FANDOM


  • Mira Laime
    Mira Laime closed this thread because:
    There are no new and relevant questions to answer at this point.
    18:32, November 4, 2019

    We announced today that in preparation for the Unified Community Platform, we will need to retire threaded forums. This will happen by mid-January next year.

    If your wiki is still actively using forums, you likely have questions on what will happen specifically when the current threaded forums are, at long last, removed from Fandom and fully replaced by Discussions, and/or the alternative for those dependent on wikitext: DPL forums. Please ask them here! If many of you are wondering about the same details, I'll edit this post later to include the most frequently asked questions and their answers right here at the top.

    Edit - these questions seem to be common so far, so I'm adding them here, along with their answers:

    Can my wiki just keep its Forums, even if they have to go elsewhere?

    No. As we've explained in various places before, the code powering the Forums (and, incidentally, also Message Wall and Article Comments) is outdated and very problematic. We're retiring Forums because we need to remove that code from our platform in order to make crucial changes. That means: Any content you have in your Forums that is not migrated to Discussions will be completely deleted by mid-January. You will no longer have a "Forum" link in your local navigation bar. You will no longer be able to use or even see the Forums. Retiring the feature means exceptions are impossible.

    (How) Can you move Forum content to DPL forums?

    The DPL forums are essentially just regular MediaWiki pages in a specific setup. As such, they will not go away with the UCP. You can set them up as explained in this guide at any time: Now, tomorrow, after the UCP launches. You do not need any staff permission to do this - except if your wiki has or has in the past had Forums enabled, in which case a Fandom staff member needs to un-archive the "Forum:" namespace. You can request this at any time as well: Now, tomorrow, after the UCP launches.

    We have not yet explored in detail how a community might switch to DPL forums. We have an automated script that can convert Forum content into Discussions content, but we do not have any automated process to convert it into DPL forum pages, nor will we create one. Both Forums and DPL forums operate on MediaWiki, but Forum posts are each their own individual MediaWiki page with one author, while a conversation in the DPL forums takes place on one page, with multiple authors, like a regular article. You can copy a Forum conversation into a DPL forum thread, but it would be a very manual process.

    2nd Edit - perhaps the most crucial questions:

    Do we HAVE to have Discussions on our wiki?

    Some of you have asked if you can disable your Forums before the migration, so Discussions does not automatically get enabled on your communities, or whether you can opt out of the migration in some other way. This would result in your community losing all of your existing Forum content. That content would not be preserved, unless you do the legwork yourself on porting it over to DPL Forums. For this, no automated process exists. It would be a lot of work, the result may be quite unsatisfying, and Fandom can't realistically help with it.

    Fandom has come away from forcing Discussions on communities that really do not want to use it. So if you're absolutely, dead-set on rather losing your Forum content than having Discussions enabled, we won't force it on you. Before you hone in on that option, though, please do consider this:

    You are not the only member of your community, and others might prefer Discussions over the alternatives, even if you don't. If you say No to Discussions and opt for DPL forums or even no Forum replacement at all, you are potentially preventing every casual visitor to your wiki from engaging with it.

    Not everyone understands how wikis work, only a tiny percentage of visitors on Fandom even know what wikitext is, but we think those who don't are still valuable community members who should be able to contribute something.

    Discussions is far from a perfect feature. We have a long list of potential improvements that users have requested since its introduction, improvements that we agree would be great, but have not had the developer capacity to implement. So far. That said, it does fulfill its basic purpose - to allow communication between groups of users - just fine. In some ways better than DPL forums, because it's much easier to use especially on mobile, sends notifications, content can be filtered, etc. The one insurmountable shortcoming it has for a wiki community is that it does not support wikitext.

    Unless your wiki's Forum conversations exclusively focus on editing debates with heavy use of templates, inline-styling, etc., which you'll want to continue on MediaWiki pages (such as DPL forums), Discussions may prove a useful feature for your wiki, despite lingering imperfections. Casual conversations can be had here. People who don't know wikitext and are a bit intimidated by actual editing but who still love the same topic you love can use it. So before you make any final decision, ask your community if really everyone would rather forego an easy conversation feature altogether. If you haven't yet, give Discussions a more thorough look - you can check it out on a lot of wikis, such as Wookieepedia. Make sure you understand the consequences of not having any easily usable social feature. And remember that you can have both: Discussions for casual conversations and non-technical debates, and DPL forums in parallel for tech talk.

    Do you really HAVE to kill Forums?

    Yes. We are fully aware that the Forums are still in active use on many big communities, that they're loved and deeply integrated into the daily activities on those communities. We know taking them away hurts. But not making the changes we need to make just so the Forums can stick around for a relatively small subset of specific communities would hurt even more, would hurt users across all of Fandom.

    Fandom as a platform desperately needs updating. Right now, all Fandom users are missing out on seven years' worth of updates the Wikimedia Foundation has made to the MediaWiki code - we have no mobile editor, for instance, and can't support many newer extensions. We can't make that update while Forums are so deeply embedded in the code. We can't feasibly update the Forum code, update Fandom's MediaWiki version, and then update the version again in the future.

    Right now, we're that person who can't update or install any new apps because their phone is way too old, but who really likes that they can swap out the battery on their phone. It's really awesome, being able to do that. Newer phones suck because they don't let you do that. You're stuck with the one, always-dying built-in battery it comes with. But newer phones can do so much more that your old one can't! So will you really keep using your stone age phone and forego playing Wizards Unite forever, or will you bite the bullet and make the upgrade already?

      Loading editor
    • Will it be possible to move all of the Forum contents to Discussions/DPL?

        Loading editor
    • Will Fandom provide support for migrating Forum to wiki-style forums, or will wikis have to do it themselves?

        Loading editor
    • Hello! I am an administrator for the Town of Salem wikia. Our wiki entirely relies on the Forum board for all discussion. Our discussion usage is very very low, and many of the posts we use are all located on the Forums. We have hundreds of thousands of threads and topics and posts on these boards.

      If these will be retired, is there a way to migrate all specific boards into Discussions and keep their content + spacing, as in can we create new boards located specifically in discussions, or will they all be lost once Forums are retired?

        Loading editor
    • Any idea on what CC Forums will be like? Will they be like /d, a DPL forum or maybe an exclusive and unique looking forum?

        Loading editor
    • Scociophobia wrote: Will it be possible to move all of the Forum contents to Discussions/DPL?

      I am not staff, so perhaps the answer has changed. However, previous answers to your type of question have been along the lines of the following:

      • DPL/wiki-syle forum
        Not much conversion needed as both this and threads parse wikitext. The main differences would be:
        1. appearance
        2. the ablity to link to a specific post
        3. where the info is stored
          • wiki-style: one page
          • threads: many pages
        4. who can edit
          • wiki-style: anyone, any post
          • threads: the poster and those with discussion moderator rights
      • Discussions/Feed
        The posts will have a final HTML rendering made and the HTML will be copied as the post. Further edits will have to be made to the HTML version not the original wikitext (which will be discarded).

      I repeat #3 and #5.

      1. So, the conversion is resumed despite a previous (fairly recent) claim that it is halted untill there is better pairity between Discussions and threads?
      2. Will the Message Wall and Comment replacements be as disconnected from the wiki content as Discussions?
      3. Are there any plans to make Discussions more connected to the actual wiki content?
      4. Is one of the issues how each comment is stored as a different page? If not, could wikis be giving the option to just disable the features but leave the content as is; effectively archiving it? This question has some personal motivation behind it as I have been slowly working on a JS script for displaying article comments on wikis where the feature has been disabled. However, if everything is going to be converted for all wikis by mid-January, then there really isn't much point in continuing.
      5. When will wikis be presented with the option between wiki-style and Discussions? Or are wikis that want wiki-style going to have to actively contact staff before some automated convert-everything-to-discussions script just happens to get around to processing the wiki?

      Not on-topic with thread conversion but still related to the blog:

      Do we know yet how much is going to change as a result of the unified platform? Previsouly, the MediaWiki update was majorly promoted but now it sounds like there might be some additional major changes as well. Also, why does it seem like these updates are affecting FANDOM more than Gamepedia? I have trouble believing it is all due to the outdated MediaWiki. It seems more likely that someone decided to make FANDOM like Gamepedia or we just aren't hearing about all the changes to Gamepedia.

        Loading editor
    • Sociophobia wrote:
      Will it be possible to move all of the Forum contents to Discussions/DPL?

      Yes, we plan to move all content from the current Forum to Discussions much as we have done in the past when a community migrated to Discussions. That means, content is copied over in HTML form, formatting stays intact, even (most) templates are displayed correctly. Links to previous Forum content lead to the content's new location in Discussions. Forum boards become Discussions categories. 

      We do not have any automated way to move content to a DPL forum. Communities that don't have the wiki-style forums yet can set them up according to this guide. We will provide support to those communities that want to start using DPL forums, but we can't do everything for them, since that would simply go beyond our support team's capacity. 

        Loading editor
    • JustLeafy wrote:
      Any idea on what CC Forums will be like? Will they be like /d, a DPL forum or maybe an exclusive and unique looking forum?

      We haven't decided yet, and we'll want to talk to the CC Crew before we come up with a definitive plan. Perhaps we'll have a hybrid - Discussions for those who want community management help or just be social, and DPL forums in parallel to that for those looking to discuss wikitext and coding matters. 

        Loading editor
    • Andrewds1021 wrote:

      [...]

      1. So, the conversion is resumed despite a previous (fairly recent) claim that it is halted untill there is better pairity between Discussions and threads?
      2. Will the Message Wall and Comment replacements be as disconnected from the wiki content as Discussions?
      3. Are there any plans to make Discussions more connected to the actual wiki content?
      4. Is one of the issues how each comment is stored as a different page? If not, could wikis be giving the option to just disable the features but leave the content as is; effectively archiving it? This question has some personal motivation behind it as I have been slowly working on a JS script for displaying article comments on wikis where the feature has been disabled. However, if everything is going to be converted for all wikis by mid-January, then there really isn't much point in continuing.
      5. When will wikis be presented with the option between wiki-style and Discussions? Or are wikis that want wiki-style going to have to actively contact staff before some automated convert-everything-to-discussions script just happens to get around to processing the wiki?

      [...]

      1. We did halt migrations earlier, and it was partially because some very big and active communities relied too much on things like text formatting and tags for Discussions to work well for them. That's what "feature parity" referred to: Text formatting and tags. Now that both have been added to Discussions, we do consider it a viable replacement for the Forums - for most communities. Some have special use cases that we can't hope to ever fully accommodate, unless we built an exact replica of the Forums, which is not a viable option. 

      2. The Message Wall and Comments replacements are still in the conception phase, so can't show you any preview yet for what they might look or even tell you how they'll work exactly. We know that Discussions is too disconnected from the wiki (a shortcoming in the way it was developed, not an intentional choice), and so we'll pay attention to not repeating that mistake. 

      3. Right now, we're focused on preparing for the UCP and figuring out those feature replacements that will absolutely be needed, so further enhancements to Discussions aren't on the immediate agenda. However, we are well aware that that's still an issue that'll eventually need to be addressed.

      4. Yes, that's part of the issue. The way Comments (and Message Walls and threaded Forums for that matter) where constructed, they mean a lot of coding headaches behind the scenes. Most users can't see those issues - for them those features work fine. Many admins get a glimpse of the issues when they keep seeing content from those features pop up erroneously in their wiki's maintenance lists and can't get them to disappear. But the real glaring downsides of these features are under the hood, and that's why we really do have to remove that code entirely. It would cost significant developer time to port them over in any remotely usable form, and we can't justify that. 

      5. You won't be given an explicit choice between DPL forums and Discussions, because it's not an either/or situation. Any wiki, regardless of what other "forum" features are already enabled, can set up DPL forums at any time - right now, or even after the Forums are gone, whatever you choose. If your community has threaded Forums enabled, they will automatically be migrated to Discussions when the time for their retirement comes, so that the content doesn't get lost. You can choose whether you then continue your conversations on Discussions or in a DPL forum. 

      As for your last question: That is better posted as a comment under the blog announcement!

        Loading editor
    • Hello! I'm an administrator for the Survivors series by Erin Hunter. Most of our wiki activity occurs in the forums and we have quite a few discussions that are currently going on. Forums have been a part of the wiki since it was created and we never migrated to Discussions. When forums are deleted, will we be forced to migrate to Dicussions or allowed to keep our current set up? 

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: 5. You won't be given an explicit choice between DPL forums and Discussions, because it's not an either/or situation. Any wiki, regardless of what other "forum" features are already enabled, can set up DPL forums at any time - right now, or even after the Forums are gone, whatever you choose. If your community has threaded Forums enabled, they will automatically be migrated to Discussions when the time for their retirement comes, so that the content doesn't get lost. You can choose whether you then continue your conversations on Discussions or in a DPL forum. 

      Does that mean we can migrate our Forum thread pages to wiki-style forums manually (with all content and attribution preserved), delete all Forum thread pages and ask for Forums to be disabled, so Discussions don't get enabled on our wiki? I got the impression that you won't be enabling Discussions on wikis without Forum, but that clearly wasn't the case on the Undertale Yellow Wiki.

        Loading editor
    • When forum posts have images in them, will the migration to discussions create copies of those images and store them separately? Or will the discussion posts refer back to the images uploaded to MediaWiki?

      Will it still be possible to request addition of DLP forums in the future even after the migration to discussions has long been completed? Or will DPL forums end up in the same situation that SMW currently is in (i.e. supported for wikis that already have it, but not possible to request anymore)?

        Loading editor
    • Is it now available again for admins to request a wiki to migrate Special:Forum to /f immediately, instead of waiting for January?

        Loading editor
    • Can you choose to not deactivate the Forums? It’s really important for our Wiki, and Discussions is basically a bad idea.

        Loading editor
    • I am not quite pleased with transitioning from forums to discussions yet, at least for a wiki I'm currently bureaucrat on.

      Forums have worked well for us, and the lack of basic forum qualities on the discussions/feeds, such as WikiText and source code, is truly going to hinder our experiences in the future.

        Loading editor
    • Can one of the Wikis that I own, FNaFRP, get a grandfather clause, or at least just archiving it's forums so that they can still be read? The Wiki really depends on having it, can you guys just at least archive it if you can't grandfather clause us?

        Loading editor
    • Is it possible to make the old Forums and old Message Walls read only? Old Forum and Message Wall messages are vital information for displaying historical references for wiki members to take note at when looking at the history of their wikis. These can make a huge impact on how wiki members can interact with each other about the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • Qwertyxp2000 the second wrote: Is it possible to make the old Forums and old Message Walls read only? Old Forum and Message Wall messages are vital information for displaying historical references for wiki members to take note at when looking at the history of their wikis. These can make a huge impact on how wiki members can interact with each other about the wiki.

      They are preserving the content... so it'll be available on Discussions and whatever the new feature replacing Message Walls is.

        Loading editor
    • Hello! I'm the bureaucrat of Animal Jam Clans Wiki, and I just have a couple concerns that I'd like to bring up. Our wiki heavily prioritizes message wall threads, forum boards, and article comments and frankly, we're not too informed of/familiar with the Discussions feature or the "wiki-style DPLforums" as we haven't interacted with them before. Message walls and forums are extremely useful and are a key part of how our moderation and staff functions. I don't mean to be rude, but I find it hard to see how maintaining the forum code serves no use to the platform when the implementation of forums hasn't been accessible for a long while now.

      1. Our wiki heavily relies on the community and the creation of threads as we are an interactive wiki with original concepts and ideas. Will this more personal/creative style of forums and message wall threads be integrated into the Discussions feature? The Discussions seem to just be a downgraded version of forums and it's clear why the communities that use forums aren't switching over to them; they're inconvenient to the interactivity of the wiki and are disorganized in the sense that there will just be thousands of discussions that are incredibly hard to maintain. I wouldn't wish this on discussions moderators or staff of other wikis that may not be able to keep up with this.

      2. How will this move take place and how will it affect our threads/forums/comments? Will any threads be deleted/lost in the process? If we do wish for a more traditional forum style of discussions, would we have to manually input these "wiki-style DPLforums"?

      Overall, I am concerned that the interactivity of the wiki and that the strong community relationship will be lost upon this change. I'd like to be informed of how this could affect our wiki and what changes we would have to make upon the removal of forums/message walls/etc. to have a smooth transition over.

        Loading editor
    • KockaAdmiralac wrote:

      Qwertyxp2000 the second wrote: Is it possible to make the old Forums and old Message Walls read only? Old Forum and Message Wall messages are vital information for displaying historical references for wiki members to take note at when looking at the history of their wikis. These can make a huge impact on how wiki members can interact with each other about the wiki.

      They are preserving the content... so it'll be available on Discussions and whatever the new feature replacing Message Walls is.

      But what about the WikiText? Most Forums and Message Walls messages contain a substantial amount of WikiText on it.

        Loading editor
    • ARavenInATree wrote:
      Hello! I'm an administrator for the Survivors series by Erin Hunter. Most of our wiki activity occurs in the forums and we have quite a few discussions that are currently going on. Forums have been a part of the wiki since it was created and we never migrated to Discussions. When forums are deleted, will we be forced to migrate to Dicussions or allowed to keep our current set up? 

      When we retire the Forums we will be removing their code from out platform. That outdated, very problematic code is the entire reason why we developed Discussions in the first place. So I'm afraid no trace of the Forums will remain, and their content has to be transferred to Discussions to not get lost. 

      KockaAdmiralac wrote: Does that mean we can migrate our Forum thread pages to wiki-style forums manually (with all content and attribution preserved), delete all Forum thread pages and ask for Forums to be disabled, so Discussions don't get enabled on our wiki? I got the impression that you won't be enabling Discussions on wikis without Forum, but that clearly wasn't the case on the Undertale Yellow Wiki.

      You could move your current Forum conversations to DPL wiki pages, yes. Keeping the original edit histories with author attributions intact could be problematic, though, because each individual post and reply in the Forums is its own page, technically speaking, and a wiki-style forum conversation is on one page, edited by multiple authors. By far the easiest path would be to have Forum content moved over to Discussions by January to have it archived and not lost, but to use DPL forums for your new and future conversations, to make a gradual shift towards DPL forums as your main conversation space.

      Wikis that never had Forums will not automatically have Discussions enabled, since there is no Forum content to migrate. We have, in the past, enabled Discussions on communities that didn't have Forums. Sometimes because they requested it themselves, sometimes because the community was abandoned and we hoped that might bring new users in, and sometimes - and this was not right! - against the explicit wishes of the community because we disagreed with them on whether Discussions would add value to their wiki. I don't know which of these cases applied to the Yellow Undertale Wiki, but if a wiki didn't enable Forums in the first place, they won't automatically get Discussions now.

      NoWayThisUsernameIsAlreadyOwnedBySomeone wrote:
      When forum posts have images in them, will the migration to discussions create copies of those images and store them separately? Or will the discussion posts refer back to the images uploaded to MediaWiki?

      Will it still be possible to request addition of DLP forums in the future even after the migration to discussions has long been completed? Or will DPL forums end up in the same situation that SMW currently is in (i.e. supported for wikis that already have it, but not possible to request anymore)?

      When Forum content is migrated to Discussions, we won't create duplicates for those files, nor will we delete file pages for images used in the Forums. The existing file pages stay where they are, the images appear in Discussions, but admins won't have to worry about having to clean up a bunch of duplicates.

      To add DPL forums, you don't have to request anything, you can just set them up - unless you've had Special:Forum enabled before, in which case the DPL forums exist on your wiki, but in an archived state. In that case, staff would have to make a change to un-archive them. That's something you can request at any time.

      SlyCooperFan1 wrote: Is it now available again for admins to request a wiki to migrate Special:Forum to /f immediately, instead of waiting for January?

      No, you'll have to wait. The last time the migration script was used was before we made a ton of changes to Discussions. That means it's outdated, not compatible with Discussions as it is today, and needs an update first. Only then can we migrate Forum content again. By the time we've updated the script accordingly, it's likely almost January anyway.

        Loading editor
    • Qwertyxp2000 the second wrote: But what about the WikiText? Most Forums and Message Walls messages contain a substantial amount of WikiText on it.

      I don't know if this will be the case after all the migrations, but wikis that already migrated still have the actual thread pages on the wiki, so you can always just view the wikitext of migrated posts if you really need to.

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: You could move your current Forum conversations to DPL wiki pages, yes. Keeping the original edit histories with author attributions intact could be problematic, though, because each individual post and reply in the Forums is its own page, technically speaking, and a wiki-style forum conversation is on one page, edited by multiple authors. By far the easiest path would be to have Forum content moved over to Discussions by January to have it archived and not lost, but to use DPL forums for your new and future conversations, to make a gradual shift towards DPL forums as your main conversation space.

      I know of all the limitations of such a move, but it's still technically possible to achieve this with the import tool. Would you consider not enabling Discussions on wikis that properly migrated all content and attribution of Forum posts to wiki-style forums?

      I guess what I'm asking here is, do we actually have a choice of whether or not Discussions are getting enabled on our wikis, even if, in cases of not getting them enabled, we would have to go through a complicated process to make wiki-style forums a proper alternative to them?

      Mira Laime wrote: Wikis that never had Forums will not automatically have Discussions enabled, since there is no Forum content to migrate. We have, in the past, enabled Discussions on communities that didn't have Forums. Sometimes because they requested it themselves, sometimes because the community was abandoned and we hoped that might bring new users in, and sometimes - and this was not right! - against the explicit wishes of the community because we disagreed with them on whether Discussions would add value to their wiki. I don't know which of these cases applied to the Yellow Undertale Wiki, but if a wiki didn't enable Forums in the first place, they won't automatically get Discussions now.

      So, Undertale Yellow Wiki is the last, bad, one? Because I explicitly requested Forums to be disabled after removing what little content we had on there (the option to disable it was already removed from WikiFeatures), just so Discussions don't get enabled on the wiki automatically. Will you be doing that to other wikis in the future, and did you consider reversing your decisions on the wikis where enabling Discussions went against the will of the community?

        Loading editor
    • Not necessarily. Not sure if all WikiTexts are supported on Discussions. On Encyclopedia SpongeBobia, there are a bunch of Hurt and Heal forum games with a huge chunk of WikiText. I don't think Discussions would at all support it, won't it?

        Loading editor
    • Qwertyxp2000 the second wrote: Not necessarily. Not sure if all WikiTexts are supported on Discussions. On Encyclopedia SpongeBobia, there are a bunch of Hurt and Heal forum games with a huge chunk of WikiText. I don't think Discussions would at all support it, won't it?

      Discussions migration takes the rendered HTML of Forum posts and dumps it into migrated Discussions posts. The content stays the same, the look probably stays the same too (especially if you styled your migrated content with inline CSS and not custom classes), but the source becomes HTML instead of wikitext and editing those becomes impossible (because the subset od user-editable HTML in Discussions is far smaller than what migrated HTML will be). No, Discussions do not support wikitext, their posts are technically stored as HTML and only formatting options are those you see in the user interface currently.

        Loading editor
    • Is there an example where there's a Forum post with lots of WikiText that has been migrated to Discussions, stored in the way as you described?

        Loading editor
    • Qwertyxp2000 the second wrote: Is there an example where there's a Forum post with lots of WikiText that has been migrated to Discussions, stored in the way as you described?

      Here's one... though it admittedly doesn't look very good (the poll is completely broken and the gallery either looks weird because I'm on phone or because the images posted are now deleted from the wiki).

        Loading editor
    • That doesn't seem to look good. Perhaps Discussions needs a bit of extra support for accurate WikiText displayal.

        Loading editor
    • KockaAdmiralac wrote:

      Qwertyxp2000 the second wrote: Is there an example where there's a Forum post with lots of WikiText that has been migrated to Discussions, stored in the way as you described?

      Here's one... though it admittedly doesn't look very good (the poll is completely broken and the gallery either looks weird because I'm on phone or because the images posted are now deleted from the wiki).

      (its not just mobile, the gallery looks weird for me on desktop too)

        Loading editor
    • Sophiedp wrote:

      KockaAdmiralac wrote:

      Qwertyxp2000 the second wrote: Is there an example where there's a Forum post with lots of WikiText that has been migrated to Discussions, stored in the way as you described?

      Here's one... though it admittedly doesn't look very good (the poll is completely broken and the gallery either looks weird because I'm on phone or because the images posted are now deleted from the wiki).

      (its not just mobile, the gallery looks weird for me on desktop too)

      Exactly. It looks completely broken to me.

        Loading editor
    • I just want to say: this sucks.

      My help on CC will probably drop by 80% when thread-style Forums shut down.

      As long as MediaWiki is the primary base for FANDOM wikis, Discussions is insufficient for support threads and the old DPL forum is way past its prime.

      It's obvious that FANDOM dev has been underfunded and lacks the expertise for a large internet company.

        Loading editor
    • After I catch up on this thread I will respond to the missing and misinformation I've read (I've saw some right away).

        Loading editor
    • Wiki-style forums
      1. You need manually add your signature (here on just called "sig") and post time and it has no direct relation to your part of the thread, it just shows the date/time from when you submitted your edit.
      2. There are no avatars unless you add them to your sig and that makes things much slower.
      3. Setting up wiki-style forums is complicated and difficult if your Forum has more than one board.
      4. Everyone who can edit a thread can edit anything on the thread including nuking the templates or categories that keep the thread in the index list of threads, so mods and admin have to keep a much closer eye on things or it will all fall apart.
      5. Formatting of separate replies is a free-for all. People can follow a standard indentation pattern or not.
      Discussions
      1. As KockaAdmiralac mentioned above, archive thread-style Forums in Discussions have no saved wikitext from the source post/reply, so anything lost in the conversion process is mostly irretrievable.
      2. No auto quoting!
      3. Still no thread highlighting!
      4. No table support.
      5. No template support.
      6. Almost no image rendering control.
      7. No useful text styles like underline, strike-through, small caps, etc.
      8. Pre-formatted text doesn't work inline and has a an annoying gray box around it all the time.
      9. No multi-level unordered or ordered lists.
      10. No indenting with a default spacing (like a tab width or 4 spaces) that respects wrapping.
      11. Multiple image support is broken or very flaky.
      12. Multiple inline linking is super annoying, because you have to kill the preview for every link you don't want.

      That's it for now. I'm sure I'll think of more.

        Loading editor
    • As Fandyllic rightly pointed out, the replacement for the wiki forum does not fulfill the qualities and the necessities that the forum offers.

      With changes like these, Fandom is moving too quickly, leaving many users and many communities behind. Not only that, but the concerns voiced on the lack of WikiText and many other things are legitimate and should not be ignored. I strongly believe the replacement feature should be developed to the point where it almost replicates the forum and has every single feature the forum brings to the table. Because that would make it an easy transition for all communities rather than "some" or "most."

        Loading editor
    • Golfpecks256 wrote:
      As Fandyllic rightly pointed out, the replacement for the wiki forum does not fulfill the qualities and the necessities that the forum offers.

      With changes like these, Fandom is moving too quickly, leaving many users and many communities behind. Not only that, but the concerns voiced on the lack of WikiText and many other things are legitimate and should not be ignored. I strongly believe the replacement feature should be developed to the point where it almost replicates the forum and has every single feature the forum brings to the table. Because that would make it an easy transition for all communities rather than "some" or "most."

      Yeah.

        Loading editor
    • Is there a way to replicate a pseudo-Forums onto special pages, such as User:Qwertyxp2000 the second/Forum Name 1 or Template:Archived Forums/Forum Name 1, by adding replica posts/messages to replace what used to be the main post and its respective message replies?

        Loading editor
    • Fandyllic wrote:
      ;Wiki-style forums
      1. You need manually add your signature (here on just called "sig") and post time and it has no direct relation to your part of the thread, it just shows the date/time from when you submitted your edit.
      2. There are no avatars unless you add them to your sig and that makes things much slower.
      3. Setting up wiki-style forums is complicated and difficult if your Forum has more than one board.
      4. Everyone who can edit a thread can edit anything on the thread including nuking the templates or categories that keep the thread in the index list of threads, so mods and admin have to keep a much closer eye on things or it will all fall apart.
      5. Formatting of separate replies is a free-for all. People can follow a standard indentation pattern or not.
      Discussions
      1. As KockaAdmiralac mentioned above, archive thread-style Forums in Discussions have no saved wikitext from the source post/reply, so anything lost in the conversion process is mostly irretrievable.
      2. No auto quoting!
      3. Still no thread highlighting!
      4. No table support.
      5. No template support.
      6. Almost no image rendering control.
      7. No useful text styles like underline, strike-through, small caps, etc.
      8. Pre-formatted text doesn't work inline and has a an annoying gray box around it all the time.
      9. No multi-level unordered or ordered lists.
      10. No indenting with a default spacing (like a tab width or 4 spaces) that respects wrapping.
      11. Multiple image support is broken or very flaky.
      12. Multiple inline linking is super annoying, because you have to kill the preview for every link you don't want.

      That's it for now. I'm sure I'll think of more.

      Why not just keep forums and stuff like that, and instead update the Wiki design, because that's the only benefit I can think of.

        Loading editor
    • DiegoFire Network wrote:
      Can you choose to not deactivate the Forums? It’s really important for our Wiki, and Discussions is basically a bad idea.

      Same with the MSM Wiki.

        Loading editor
    • Doritodorito wrote:

      DiegoFire Network wrote:
      Can you choose to not deactivate the Forums? It’s really important for our Wiki, and Discussions is basically a bad idea.

      Same with the MSM Wiki.

      That ship has sailed.

        Loading editor
    • Wow! There sure have been a lot of replies since I last looked at this thread. Though I suppose that is to be expected given the many many many discussions/arguments that have been had over this transition ever since Discussions was announced way back when. There are some things in particular I will reply to but I want to first give my response to what I think is the general gist of what has been said since my last post.

      1. This transition has been a long time in the making. Maybe it will be halted again, maybe not. However, there is almost 0% chance it will be canceled at this point. Sooner or later, every wiki will have to deal with it. That is just a fact.
      2. DPL/wiki-style forums is not going to be affected by this transition and will remain an option for wikis regardless.
      3. The transition will convert Forum to Discussions; this is not optional. Conversion to wiki-style forum is something wikis must do on their own; and before Wikia's script comes through and removes Forum.

      This one I tried to ask in my first post but it got overshadowed by a different yet similar question. Since some others have brought it up in some form or another, I am going to mention it again.

      Right now, the plan is to convert everything and remove all the associated code. The code is hard to manage, okay, fine. But why does that mean that things need to be converted "right now"? Is it not possible to allow wikis to keep the content pages as they are just without the code for the operating feature? I am thinking similar to what happens to comments when talk pages are enabled. The comments aren't deleted, they just become hard to view and special protections are placed on them. In essence, they become archived. Why can't there be some sort of archival-type option?

      From the reply to my earlier post, it sounds like the problem is with the code for the feature; partially as a result of the page structure. However, it was not mentioned that the page structure itself is a problem. So, at the very least, I don't understand why wikis need to remove that structure "right now". It would be nice to have this archival-state at least for a limited time so wikis can take time converting to wiki-style forums. The wiki I admin has tons of threads and I am the only active user. Even if I spent all of my spare time converting them, I doubt it would be done by mid-January when the bot or whatever comes around to devour all the thread-related pages.

      Ideally, I would prefer the option for an indefinite archival state. In that case, some JS could be made for displaying the content without the ability to edit/create the content. However, if that is already definitely off the table, could we at least have some temporary archival state for wikis that need more time to convert to wiki-style forums?

      I understand that the content is "preserved" when converting to Discussions. However, that is just the end result. As has already been mentioned several times, the wikitext will be erased from existence and the only way to save it, right now, is to manually move everything to wiki-style forums.


      1. I refer you to Fandyllic’s detailed list in #33.
      2. Okay, I guess.
      3. Fair enough.
      4. I refer you to my general reply above.
      5. Okay. Thanks for explicitly addressing this question from my previous post but your immediately prior replies sort of already clarified this point.

      Unfortunately, wikitext has about 0% chance of ever being supported in Discussions. This is a topic that has come up many times before. That being said, there is still a lot more that could be added to come closer to "feature parity"; at least in my opinion. Fandyllic made a decent list in #33.


      Are timestamps also preserved? Without those, it would be difficult keeping track of which thread came first.


      I don't mean to be rude; especially as a fellow Discussions skeptic. However, I feel most of your questions have already been addressed in the other posts. Have you read them?


      Mira Laime wrote: ...

      By far the easiest path would be to have Forum content moved over to Discussions by January to have it archived and not lost, but to use DPL forums for your new and future conversations, to make a gradual shift towards DPL forums as your main conversation space.

      ...

      When Forum content is migrated to Discussions, we won't create duplicates for those files, nor will we delete file pages for images used in the Forums. The existing file pages stay where they are, the images appear in Discussions, but admins won't have to worry about having to clean up a bunch of duplicates.

      ...

      From previous discussions, I was under the impression that converted threads would be editable. Is that not true?

      The answer is probably obvious to anyone whose wiki already has Discussions, but since mine doesn't, I am asking. Are the converted images treated differently from images that are posted new? If so, how? Also, is the image database shared between Discussions and the wiki. Like, can I use a 5-year-old image from the wiki in Discussions? If I post a new image in Discussions, does it also get added to the wiki? If so, does MediaWiki:Titleblacklist still get applied?


      That is not my understanding based on the recent posts. It sounds to me like the thread pages will be deleted.


      KockaAdmiralac wrote: ...

      I know of all the limitations of such a move, but it's still technically possible to achieve this with the import tool.

      ...

      I don't see how you could preserve all the page info like history and whatnot. Am I misunderstanding what you are saying?


      That is not quite what I would consider "preserving content". From other posts, I am getting the feeling some of them agree with me.

      Since Discussions is not part of MediaWiki, do the same restrictions on HTML apply or is it a separate set of restrictions?

      Either way, it seems like being able to edit the posts would be really nice if you have an ongoing discussion. Perhaps better HTML editing should be added to the Discussions to-do list.


      I don't know what it looks like for you, but it looks like complete trash for me. And for those of you who know me, no, I am not using IE; I am using Chrome.


      All great points. Which ones are in response to misinformation? Some of them appear to be correcting things that no one has even mentioned (ex. whether or not signature are automatic for wiki-style forums).


      My response to this is covered by my above response to your other post.


      Not that I know of. As I mentioned in #6, I was/am working on something that could possibly be used if the content pages, system messages, and CSS were allowed to remain. However, it sounds like they are planning to nuke the feature off the platform.


      Just to make sure we are clear, the rest of the platform is getting updated; majorly. That is the reason why Forum and related features "need" to be retired. The problem isn't that everything else can't keep pace with Forum, the problem is that Forum can't keep pace with everything else.

        Loading editor
    • IDK about this

        Loading editor
    • Fandyllic wrote:
      [snip]

      Agree. Basically the DPL forums is just the old forum system before threaded forums were introduced back in 2012. This pretty much means it's gonna be a major step backward from what we currently have. It's much more complicated, has less features, and is way more difficult to use than threaded forums. Fandom should really reconsider this decision because these moves do absolutely nothing to improve their site and will be detrimental to many communities that depend on the threaded forums.

      And Discussions won't cut it either as it looks a lot like some kind of Reddit knock-off with absolutely no customization and no way to organize posts with subforums or the like. None of the replacements are good alternatives. They should've just ported the forums/comments/wall to the new version of MediaWiki instead of completely abandoning it. If Fandom can create Discussions, why can't they port the forums?

        Loading editor
    • You see only one side of Forums. Under the hood, it was very ugly and unmaintainable, and terrible on mobile. At a certain point, it requires more patchwork than it’s worth.

        Loading editor
    • This isn't quite the right place to ask this, but beyond posting on the blog post, I'm not sure if there's a better place to do it.

      One thing I'm curious about (and haven't seen mentioned yet) is the plan for Blogs. As far as I know, there hasn't been a mention of what's going to happen to them after the forum code (Comments) has been removed. So: After mid Jan. 2020, what's going happen to Blog posts?

      I feel like comments are a fairly integral part of a blog post on FANDOM, beyond being able to share your opinion. They're heavily (mis)used on the wiki's where I'm active to ask support questions (as opposed to getting help in the dedicated Special:Forums board) and to hold pages for review (and feedback) prior to putting them in the main namespace.

        Loading editor
    • Again, not the best place to ask. Since the goal of UCP is to bring FANDOM's mediawiki version up to date, what are the chances of Structured Discussions becoming available?

        Loading editor
    • Discussions is a garbage product, but I understand there will be another option to use once Special:Forums is retired. Can I see a demo somewhere?

        Loading editor
    • Scarecroe wrote: Discussions is a garbage product, but I understand there will be another option to use once Special:Forums is retired. Can I see a demo somewhere?

      There is no demo (yet), and Discussions is no more garbage than Forums was.

        Loading editor
    • I'm a strong believer that every new feature should match/expectations of the old feature.

      If discussions does not have or cannot replicate WikiText/markup, then I strongly believe the forum should be kept for the communities that need them most. This also applies to any other forum features that discussions/community feeds would also leave behind.

      If I'm being honest, I'm disappointed at the fact that it appears every community will be forced to adopt a feature that can be a significant detriment to those that require forum features that discussions won't support.

        Loading editor
    • Golfpecks256 wrote: ...I strongly believe the forum should be kept for the communities that need them most.

      That's nice and all, but who "needs them most"? Who would decide? For one, it's a place like Dev, Central or Portability. To another, it's their RP forum that relies heavily on templates and everything is RUINED forever if they have to change even a tiny bit.

        Loading editor
    • Tupka217 wrote:

      Scarecroe wrote: Discussions is a garbage product, but I understand there will be another option to use once Special:Forums is retired. Can I see a demo somewhere?

      There is no demo (yet), and Discussions is no more garbage than Forums was.

      I just mean that it's not a wiki product.

        Loading editor
    • Tupka217 wrote:

      Golfpecks256 wrote: ...I strongly believe the forum should be kept for the communities that need them most.

      That's nice and all, but who "needs them most"? Who would decide? For one, it's a place like Dev, Central or Portability. To another, it's their RP forum that relies heavily on templates and everything is RUINED forever if they have to change even a tiny bit.

      When I say "communities that need them most," I'm talking about keeping the feature available in general for communities that rely on forum features that are unique to the forum.

      Therefore, communities can request to implement the forum if their reasons are legitimate concerns to staff. That way, the transition would work for everyone and wouldn't hinder the experiences of those who need the forum, including those central wikis you just mentioned.

        Loading editor
    • Golfpecks256 wrote:

      Tupka217 wrote:

      Golfpecks256 wrote: ...I strongly believe the forum should be kept for the communities that need them most.

      That's nice and all, but who "needs them most"? Who would decide? For one, it's a place like Dev, Central or Portability. To another, it's their RP forum that relies heavily on templates and everything is RUINED forever if they have to change even a tiny bit.

      When I say "communities that need them most," I'm talking about keeping the feature available in general for communities that rely on forum features that are unique to the forum.

      Therefore, communities can request to implement the forum if their reasons are legitimate concerns to staff. That way, the transition would work for everyone and wouldn't hinder the experiences of those who need the forum, including those central wikis you just mentioned.

      But what if their concerns are not legitimate to staff? In the strictest, strictest sense, very few wikis actually need Forums over Discussions.

        Loading editor
    • Andrewds1021 wrote: <div style="background-color: lightgray; padding: 10px;">

      This burns my eyes on FANSUN, btw.

      Andrewds1021 wrote: Are timestamps also preserved? Without those, it would be difficult keeping track of which thread came first.

      If you look at the migrated Forum posts of the user whose Discussions post I linked before, you'll see that timestamps were properly migrated too.

      Andrewds1021 wrote: From previous discussions, I was under the impression that converted threads would be editable. Is that not true?

      Not exactly. Discussions saves post content as HTML. This means whatever is in the database for the HTML of the post is displayed directly to the user. For this to not be a huge security issue, they are removing non-whitelisted HTML tags and attributes from user input whenever a new post is created/edited. The Discussions migration script saves rendered HTML of Forum posts into the database directly, so some non-whitelisted tags/attributes appear in there that will get stripped once the post is edited (again, for security reasons).

      For some reason, the old migration script also stripped <script> tags from rendered HTML, even though there was no way to insecurely insert one, and the only thing that achieved was screwing up what previously was the poll tag as you can see in the post I linked above.

      Andrewds1021 wrote: Are the converted images treated differently from images that are posted new? If so, how? Also, is the image database shared between Discussions and the wiki. Like, can I use a 5-year-old image from the wiki in Discussions? If I post a new image in Discussions, does it also get added to the wiki? If so, does MediaWiki:Titleblacklist still get applied?

      Images in Discussions are a completely separate system from images uploaded to the wiki (the only same things between them being the image host and image review). You cannot set a title to your Discussions images, so the title blacklist does not apply. You also don't have the option of viewing "all Discussions images" as of yet.

      By the way, the above gallery seems to be screwed up for two reasons:

      1. The migrated content contains HTML that is supposed to display an image after lazyloading of said image occurs. However, Discussions just doesn't have that lazyloading system and images remain undisplayed after migration.
      2. The images on there just seem to be embedded from the wiki images, so after migrating Forum posts to Discussions wikis will be left with a lot of unused files that, if they delete, will no longer work on Discussions (with no indication on what post were they posted on). Yes, the migration script really sucked that bad.
      Andrewds1021 wrote: I don't see how you could preserve all the page info like history and whatnot. Am I misunderstanding what you are saying?

      Yes. The import tool allows you to attribute any edit to any user by editing the imported XML, and that can be used to turn page creations into edits on a single page by users who created these pages.

      Andrewds1021 wrote: Since Discussions is not part of MediaWiki, do the same restrictions on HTML apply or is it a separate set of restrictions?

      As I mentioned above, Discussions HTML whitelist is at the moment stricter than MediaWiki's, as Discussions has way less features and valid user input to whitelist.

      Andrewds1021 wrote: Either way, it seems like being able to edit the posts would be really nice if you have an ongoing discussion. Perhaps better HTML editing should be added to the Discussions to-do list.

      I don't see how do you expect to achieve this without opening major security holes. Did you mean whitelisting more tags/attributes in Discussions?

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:

      JustLeafy wrote:
      Any idea on what CC Forums will be like? Will they be like /d, a DPL forum or maybe an exclusive and unique looking forum?

      We haven't decided yet, and we'll want to talk to the CC Crew before we come up with a definitive plan. Perhaps we'll have a hybrid - Discussions for those who want community management help or just be social, and DPL forums in parallel to that for those looking to discuss wikitext and coding matters. 

      Yeah, I would want something like that, honestly. Good old classics of using wikitext with a modern Forum design. I think Fandom Developers Wiki should have that type of communication feature, too, because I think Discussions there is a bit ridiculous for the primary purpose of the support forum: fixing and/or helping out with other people's code problems.

        Loading editor
    • reply to #44 and #45 by Forge the Hybrid

      I am guessing the blogs themselves will not be affected but that blog comments are included in the term "comments". So basically whatever happens to article comments will happen to blog comments. I am just guessing though.

      As for Structured Discussions, I doubt it will be added as it wouldn't be a good idea to have too many different discussion modes. However, the MediaWiki update certainly does open the door for many extensions to be added. Perhaps Forms (replacement for SMW Semantic Forms) could be added. That would bring back a nice customizability aspect.


      What is the other option? I was not aware of another new discussion feature.


      That is great in theory. Unfortunately, as has already been stated, there are practical limits that get in the way.


      First, thanks for the info. Your replies were very informative.

      I am sorry to hear that it burns your eyes. To be frank though, you really can't expect other users to go around checking everyone else's personal CSS/JS to make sure their choice of colors workd for everyone.

      Thanks particularly for the info on HTML. If it is for security reasons, then I guess there isn't much that can be done. That being said, it sounds like the whiltelist for Discussions is a subset of that for MediaWiki. Do you know why some tags are not secure in Discussions even though they are on the wiki? If they are secure but just not whitelisted, then I think they should be whitelisted. I think it would help if the Discussions whitelist was as close to the MediaWiki whitelist as safely possible.

      So essentially what this means is that the posts are technically editable but from a practical standpoint, they might as well be archived. All the more reason for an actual archival state rather than this archived-but-not-really situation.

      Regarding images, I assume that even though they are on the same host, they are in different directories, yes? Otherwise, I don't see why it would make sense to have two otherwise separate systems store images in the same place. If I am understanding correctly, to use an image both in Discussions and on the wiki, you have to upload it twice; once with each method? That seems like creating the potential for a lot of duplicate files.

      I see. I hadn't considered the possability of doctoring the XML. Even though I did try that a while back when attempting to import one of my test pages here on CC to the wiki I admin (didn't work due to namespace restrictions though).


      Based on what I know, that is about the only option available. There are going to be only two discussion features: Discussions and DPL Forum. One supports wikitext and the other doesn't. That doesn't leave any choice in the matter.

        Loading editor
    • Is it just me or is FANDOM community relations doing less and less since the Gamepedia reverse takeover... expecting wiki admins to undertake wikit-style forum conversion without much help or automation seems like spitting in hundreds of people eyes all at once.

        Loading editor
    • Well, if I am understanding correctly, they aren't really offering DPL Forum as an alternative. They are simply saying that wikis that feel wikitext is critical are free to enable DPL Forum; which has always been the case. The bottom line is that the conversion is from Forum to Discussions. Anything else is the responsability of the wiki. At least, that it how it seems to me at this point.

        Loading editor
    • Andrewds1021 wrote:
      Well, if I am understanding correctly, they aren't really offering DPL Forum as an alternative. They are simply saying that wikis that feel wikitext is critical are free to enable DPL Forum; which has always been the case. The bottom line is that the conversion is from Forum to Discussions. Anything else is the responsibility of the wiki. At least, that it how it seems to me at this point.

      Yes, that is accurate.

      There are also a lot of other good points here - thanks especially to Fandyllic, Andrewds1021 and KockaAdmiralac who shared a lot of details (correctly) so I won't need to repeat them. 

      There are a few points of confusion, it seems: 

      Can you edit Forum posts once they've been migrated to Discussions?

      Yes, you can edit them. Admins and moderators can edit any post at any time, even a very old one, and one that was previously a Forum post. However, all formatting will be stripped from a migrated post when you edit it. 

      This older blog post details what exactly happens when Forum content is migrated to Discussions. It links some (older) examples, too. At the time this was written, Discussions didn't have any text formatting yet, didn't have @ mentions or tags and still looked different, but when we migrate Forum content by mid-January, we will be using an updated version of that same script to do that, so the information in this post is still helpful. 

      You can't structure content in Discussions at all because it doesn't have Boards

      Not quite true - Discussions lets you group content into distinct categories. Each post can only be in one category at a time, and you can filter the main feed to show you only one or several specific categories. This isn't quite the same as Boards, but serves much the same purpose. By default, Discussions comes with only one category (General), and the area where admins can create additional categories and where users can filter by category is a bit hidden, which led to the misconception that there is no subdivision, but there is.

      Granted: It's not a perfect Board replacement. Some users are lazy and just leave everything in "General" even if there is a better category for it. 


      I'll be editing my beginning post above to answer two more of the most frequently voiced concerns: Whether you can say No to Discussions entirely, and once again why we do really have to remove Forums.

      Also - re: What happened with the Yellow Undertale Wiki: I can see in our records that Discussions was enabled there in December last year, after the Forums had already been disabled in May 2017. This isn't unusual: We've had plenty of communities (some that did and some that did not have Forums) request that we enable Discussions. The log doesn't show who exactly requested that Discussions be enabled there. Fandom's old support system where that request would have been recorded is now gone, so, sadly, I can't solve the mystery of who asked for this. It doesn't look like a situation where staff just enabled Discussions without anyone's consent, since this is a smaller wiki, not featured in the Fandom app, and the staff member who did it is someone who would only make such a change upon an admin's request.

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: Also - re: What happened with the Yellow Undertale Wiki: I can see in our records that Discussions was enabled there in December last year, after the Forums had already been disabled in May 2017. This isn't unusual: We've had plenty of communities (some that did and some that did not have Forums) request that we enable Discussions. The log doesn't show who exactly requested that Discussions be enabled there. Fandom's old support system where that request would have been recorded is now gone, so, sadly, I can't solve the mystery of who asked for this. It doesn't look like a situation where staff just enabled Discussions without anyone's consent, since this is a smaller wiki, not featured in the Fandom app, and the staff member who did it is someone who would only make such a change upon an admin's request.

      If you're talking about wikia.zendesk.com, wasn't that migrated to fandom.zendesk.com?

        Loading editor
    • So, I know for a fact that when the first push came to get wikis to migrate to Discussions, they were conveniently not told that they could keep thread-style Forum around, if they asked, so many wikis basically let FANDOM staff disable or migrate Forum early. Once that was done there was no going back.

      Also, I'll make some additional points:

      • It keeps being mentioned that thread-style Forums are a mess on the back end and cause various problems for FANDOM behind the scenes. I don't dispute this, but who is responsible for this mess? FANDOM can only point back to itself. A proper dev organization either wouldn't have let this happen and get so bad or would have re-factored or rewrote that bad parts at least in stages over time to avoid the disaster that became inevitable.
      • The killing of thread-style Forum is purely a business decision and reflects the lack of technical expertise in FANDOM dev and the poor planning of the past. If FANDOM staff did a better job of offering alternatives to soften the blow, I would have more sympathy, but it seems their basic stance is: tough sh!t.
      • FANDOM staff underappreciates, underestimates, and takes for granted the amount of volunteer help they get from the community and long time admins. Personally, I'm finally tired of it after over 10 years. I came back to Wikia/FANDOM after the Oasis Wars, but I guess one can only take getting punched in the face so many times.
        Loading editor
    • Andrewds1021 wrote: I am sorry to hear that it burns your eyes. To be frank though, you really can't expect other users to go around checking everyone else's personal CSS/JS to make sure their choice of colors workd for everyone.

      I wasn't particularly serious, just noting that sometimes not making color choices is better than making them.

      Andrewds1021 wrote: Thanks particularly for the info on HTML. If it is for security reasons, then I guess there isn't much that can be done. That being said, it sounds like the whiltelist for Discussions is a subset of that for MediaWiki. Do you know why some tags are not secure in Discussions even though they are on the wiki? If they are secure but just not whitelisted, then I think they should be whitelisted. I think it would help if the Discussions whitelist was as close to the MediaWiki whitelist as safely possible.

      If I was (and when I was) building my own HTML whitelist I would intend to be as strict as possible, and only include tags that I intend users to enter as a part of the user interface. It is a good security practice to give everybody as little permissions as possible, and while new HTML tags/attributes aren't necessarily "permissions", it certainly sounds hacky if there are whitelisted HTML tags that aren't supported by the user interface.

      That said, the whitelist MediaWiki applies is on tags allowed in wikitext: extensions could still register their hooks that return HTML that otherwise couldn't be injected via wikitext, and if you wanted a fully functioning editor for old Forum posts the Discussions HTML whitelist would have to include all (or most) tags generated by Fandom's MediaWiki extensions, which is way bigger than MediaWiki's HTML whitelist in wikitext. For example:

      • [[File:]] links, let alone the lazyloading system, use <figure> and <figcaption>.
        • If used on audio files, they also insert inline JavaScript in onclick attributes.
      • <poll> tag injects a <script> tag in the rendered HTML.
      • Integration tags like <googleforms>, <apester> and <polldaddy> insert iframe elements into the DOM which are certainly something users should not be able to insert easily into pages.
      Andrewds1021 wrote: Regarding images, I assume that even though they are on the same host, they are in different directories, yes? Otherwise, I don't see why it would make sense to have two otherwise separate systems store images in the same place. If I am understanding correctly, to use an image both in Discussions and on the wiki, you have to upload it twice; once with each method? That seems like creating the potential for a lot of duplicate files.

      "directories" is an oversimplification with the huge cloud services Fandom uses for their file storage (Google Cloud Storage, among others probably?) and with how these files have to go through both Vignette and Fastly before being served to users, but yes, they are most likely stored pretty separately. Yes, to use an image in both places (with a proper image embed and not just relying on link embeds embedding the file you need) you'll have to upload it in both places. I don't think files duplicated in Discussions are an issue at all, though: you don't see a list of them, you can't reupload them, non-Staff can't delete them (aside from removing them from posts, I believe?) from the servers and there is generally no maintenance you, as a user, need to do on these files. When compared:

      • Regular image URL: https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/kocka/images/f/fe/MmLol.png
        • /images/f/fe/MmLol.png suggests the file is used by MediaWiki instances, considering how this is how file paths are generated in vanilla MediaWiki too. A default installation of MediaWiki stores images in an images folder on the server that hosts the wiki, f is the first letter of the MD5 hash of the file's name (in this case fed4b0f022cb5142689a5a939d701107) and fe are the first two letters of it, see mw:Manual:$wgHashedUploadDirectory.
        • It is often served with Vignette paths, as well with /revision/latest (this is a MediaWiki thing for linking to older file revisions).
      • Discussions image URL: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/483ec4f2-4580-4c62-ab0c-794ebaf41a0d
        • This is the same "host" used for avatars. In fact, with Discussions API you can embed people's avatars into Discussions posts (thought they won't update).
        • It allows for Vignette URL paths like usual URLs: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/483ec4f2-4580-4c62-ab0c-794ebaf41a0d/scale-to-width-down/16
        • The most important difference seems to be that you can't tell where the image was uploaded only based on its URL.
        • I will be able to provide information about the image whitelist on Discussions at a later date.
      Mira Laime wrote: Also - re: What happened with the Yellow Undertale Wiki: I can see in our records that Discussions was enabled there in December last year, after the Forums had already been disabled in May 2017. This isn't unusual: We've had plenty of communities (some that did and some that did not have Forums) request that we enable Discussions. The log doesn't show who exactly requested that Discussions be enabled there. Fandom's old support system where that request would have been recorded is now gone, so, sadly, I can't solve the mystery of who asked for this. It doesn't look like a situation where staff just enabled Discussions without anyone's consent, since this is a smaller wiki, not featured in the Fandom app, and the staff member who did it is someone who would only make such a change upon an admin's request.

      I was the only active admin on the wiki at the time you mentioned. The wiki's founder came back from the dead really recently after being gone since 2016, and the other administrator there, Cheeseskates, has been promoted in February this year. Fandom's "old support system", as Sophiedp mentioned, isn't really gone - all support tickets have been migrated to the new one. For example, here is the my request about disabling Forum and not migrating to Discussions on that wiki in May 2017. I cannot remember making a request to enable Discussions at that time (especially since I was busy with many other things), but I can investigate further to see if somebody from related wikis knows more about it. I'm glad to hear you don't generally intend to force wikis without Forum enabled into using Discussions.

        Loading editor
    • I am generally ok with this decision, but I have some ideas for improving the new features.

      • A message wall replacement would be helpful. User to user communication has been a very useful feature of Fandom.
      • I’ve heard that posts can only be edited 24 hours after posting on discussions. The ability to edit posts anytime would be useful.

      Those are the only improvement suggestions I have as of now.

        Loading editor
    • I can ask the staff member who enabled Discussions on the Yellow Undertale Wiki, though I doubt they remember who requested it, or even where - it's possible that wasn't even via our support system, but via Slack, a message wall, any conversation with staff anywhere. 

      Message Walls will get a replacement, as is mentioned in the blog post. And Admins and Moderators can edit Discussions posts at any time. Regular users can't because they'd otherwise have the power to retroactively remove the foundation for an entire conversation, rendering replies meaningless, or trolling people by switching their original post around later.

      Fandyllic wrote:
      • It keeps being mentioned that thread-style Forums are a mess on the back end and cause various problems for FANDOM behind the scenes. I don't dispute this, but who is responsible for this mess? FANDOM can only point back to itself. A proper dev organization either wouldn't have let this happen and get so bad or would have re-factored or rewrote that bad parts at least in stages over time to avoid the disaster that became inevitable.
      • The killing of thread-style Forum is purely a business decision and reflects the lack of technical expertise in FANDOM dev and the poor planning of the past. If FANDOM staff did a better job of offering alternatives to soften the blow, I would have more sympathy, but it seems their basic stance is: tough sh!t.
      • FANDOM staff underappreciates, underestimates, and takes for granted the amount of volunteer help they get from the community and long time admins. Personally, I'm finally tired of it after over 10 years. I came back to Wikia/FANDOM after the Oasis Wars, but I guess one can only take getting punched in the face so many times.

      Of course Fandom is responsible for the un-updatable mess that is Forums (and Message Walls, Article Comments, Achievements, Chat ...). Those features were built years ago with no regard to the future. Of course that should have been done differently, and solved much earlier with more care. We are not arguing that point at all. What we do have to do is make the best with the unfortunate situation we're in now and do our best not to repeat these mistakes. Fandom has a very different engineering organisation now than it did when these features were built. Our leadership has changed and our community team has considerably changed this year as well.  

      Despite all of that, the Forums are still a feature we can't carry any longer. For every user who is very disappointed about Forums going away are many others who will benefit from the changes we can finally make once they're gone (and sometimes those are the same people).

      We'll be reaching out to the remaining active Forum communities to make sure they're fully aware the feature is now at long last really being retired, and support them in the transition as best we can. But we really can't get around this step.

        Loading editor
    • @mira would it be possible to create a topic/board/whatever that lets only mods/admins create thread/convos/etc on/in it, but allows all users to reply to any threads posted on the board?

        Loading editor
    • It's possible, but would require some engineering. What would you want to use that for?

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: It's possible, but would require some engineering. What would you want to use that for?

      SU uses it for doing announcements about the wiki and etc (kinda like the technical update threads here on CC)

        Loading editor
    • What is going to replace Forum on CC and Dev? Will a FANDOM staffer setup wiki-style forums or they will just have Discussions?

        Loading editor
    • Sophiedp wrote:

      Mira Laime wrote: It's possible, but would require some engineering. What would you want to use that for?

      SU uses it for doing announcements about the wiki and etc (kinda like the technical update threads here on CC)

      That's an important use case, but it does it need its own category? You could have a general "wiki business" category where anyone can post, but only admin announcements get an actual notification sent out

      As for the CC and Dev Forum replacements: That's not decided yet, although it seems pretty clear that Discussions alone will not cut it, given that those two are all about discussing code. If they need DPL forums set up, yes, staff will help. 

        Loading editor
    • Will the Forum code be released for public use? Or will it simply die completely with no sight or sound of it to be seen again.

        Loading editor
    • When will this transfer occur? I need to know so I have a deadline for when I have to get my posts copied over to preserve them, and I'd like to know so I can see if I'll have to deal with crappy discussions before I leave the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • Darkmoon the IceWing NightWing wrote: When will this transfer occur? I need to know so I have a deadline for when I have to get my posts copied over to preserve them, and I'd like to know so I can see if I'll have to deal with crappy discussions before I leave the wiki.

      It's due on mid-January apparently.

        Loading editor
    • Okay. I guess I'll have to deal with discussions for a few months.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, it's happening on mid-January. Though, I wish we can just somehow entirely migrate the Forums into Discussions.

        Loading editor
    • I'm from the Wings of Fire Wiki. Our community is nearly entirely based around Forums, and Discussions really don't suit our needs (plus I so far haven't found a single user here who likes Discussions).

      We understand that Forums have to be removed but as it is now I don't think our community could survive the shift (and many of us are unable to use other platforms). Could you explain DPL forums? What are they like?  Can you have both DPL forums and current Forums enabled at the same time? We have an Experiments wiki for the staff to test code before using it on the real wiki. Could we enable DPL forums there to test them?

      Also, could you give me an example of them or a wiki that uses them?

      I'll pass the answers I get on to the Wings of Fire community.

        Loading editor
    • Lemonshrike wrote: Will the Forum code be released for public use? Or will it simply die completely with no sight or sound of it to be seen again.

      The code has always been public, but it relies on features only implemented in Fandom's current fork of MediaWiki, and the current fork relies on several external services, so I doubt it would be of much use to you.

      Hazeart27 wrote: Could you explain DPL forums? What are they like?  Can you have both DPL forums and current Forums enabled at the same time? We have an Experiments wiki for the staff to test code before using it on the real wiki. Could we enable DPL forums there to test them?

      Also, could you give me an example of them or a wiki that uses them?

      DPL forums are explained on their help page, and a setup guide is also provided. If you need an example, see Forum:Index here on Community Central or the one on Wookieepedia. I got DPL forums enabled alongside regular Forum/Discussions before on a test wiki, so I'm pretty sure you can just contact Staff to unlock the Forum namespace for you to set them up.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you! I'll check it out and discuss it with the rest of the community.

        Loading editor
    • Could you try your best to add WIkiText to Discussions at least? That would make them better than they are now. How do we migrate Forum threads to DIscussons anyway?

        Loading editor
    • If they knew of a way to add WikiText to Discussions, don't you think they would've done so ages ago?

        Loading editor
    • Discussions is built entirely outside of MediaWiki, on different technology. So adding wikitext support would be really time-consuming. And we'd risk echoing the issues the current Forums have by once again forcing code into an existing infrastructure that wasn't set up to work with that code. 

      Unlike the Forums, Discussions can be updated, so it's likely we'll keep making more improvements to it, even though we can't do it immediately, given all the other work that is underway for the UCP. 

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: Discussions is built entirely outside of MediaWiki, on different technology. So adding wikitext support would be really time-consuming. And we'd risk echoing the issues the current Forums have by once again forcing code into an existing infrastructure that wasn't set up to work with that code. 

      Unlike the Forums, Discussions can be updated, so it's likely we'll keep making more improvements to it, even though we can't do it immediately, given all the other work that is underway for the UCP. 

      As I recently had to pour through long, old message wall threads to find a bad category accidentally added to a Forum thread, I shudder to think how it would look/work if someone were to do that on Discussions. Also, WLH would miss these and there is no good search, so any kind of stray link cleanup would be impossible.

        Loading editor
    • What will happen to community central's forums? It's the only forums I use (and it's future us purely up to staff since staff run wiki) and I won't touch discord with a 10 foot pole.

        Loading editor
    • As mentioned a couple of times above, it's not decided yet what will happen to Central.

        Loading editor
    • Tupka217 wrote: As mentioned a couple of times above, it's not decided yet what will happen to Central.

      Ah Ty, I did a page search (Community Central) on page and didn't see it mentioned.

        Loading editor
    • It's usually referred to as "CC" for (I imagine) ease of typing.

        Loading editor
    • Forge the Hybrid wrote: It's usually referred to as "CC" for (I imagine) ease of typing.

      I figured that after the fact.

        Loading editor
    • By the way, considering the fact that the threadengine will be gone, what is the replacement for message walls and comments, and when will they be removed?

      Will the replacement be exactly like discussions, lacking the elements of the precedent, or will they be improved versions that fulfill all the desires of the wall and comments and bring great improvements?

        Loading editor
    • We don't have an answer for that yet, since we're still in the process of figuring out how exactly we'll replace message walls and article comments. What we can say for sure is that there will be a replacement. Once we have anything more concrete to share, you can bet that we will share it!

        Loading editor
    • Will there be a replacement developed for Comments? If so, will it still be on the mainspace wiki so we don't lose the portion of users that stick to the mainspace or do we have to move that to the flaming trash heap that is Discussions?

        Loading editor
    • ProblematicPeriwinklePlum wrote: Will there be a replacement developed for Comments? If so, will it still be on the mainspace wiki so we don't lose the portion of users that stick to the mainspace or do we have to move that to the flaming trash heap that is Discussions?

      This might shock you, but there are plenty of users who consider Comments the flaming trash heap.

        Loading editor
    • Tupka217 wrote:

      ProblematicPeriwinklePlum wrote: Will there be a replacement developed for Comments? If so, will it still be on the mainspace wiki so we don't lose the portion of users that stick to the mainspace or do we have to move that to the flaming trash heap that is Discussions?

      This might shock you, but there are plenty of users who consider Comments the flaming trash heap.

      Including you...?

        Loading editor
    • ProblematicPeriwinklePlum wrote:
      Will there be a replacement developed for Comments? If so, will it still be on the mainspace wiki so we don't lose the portion of users that stick to the mainspace or do we have to move that to the flaming trash heap that is Discussions?

      Yes, we are working on a replacement for Comments. We don't know what exactly they'll look like, so we can't share more details just yet. 

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:

      Sophiedp wrote:

      Mira Laime wrote: It's possible, but would require some engineering. What would you want to use that for?

      SU uses it for doing announcements about the wiki and etc (kinda like the technical update threads here on CC)

      That's an important use case, but it does it need its own category? You could have a general "wiki business" category where anyone can post, but only admin announcements get an actual notification sent out.

      I would like to echo this request. My wiki has an "Announcements" post category in the Community Feed to mimic one of the Special:Forum boards where we would post announcements and allow users to scroll back through the official announcements. As it is right now, any user can post in the Announcements category; one user recently posted "it's my birthday" in there. We would like to be able to restrict at least one category to only admins and mods being able to create topics (not replies; all users should be able to reply as normal). So yes, this would be a helpful feature to have.

      I should make mention of the fact that the actual Announcements feature itself has no such log for users to go back through a wiki's previous announcements, especially those that occurred before the user joined, in case they wanted to see previous important discussions.

        Loading editor
    • Hi, bureaucrat of the Plants vs. Zombies Wiki here.

      Our community relies on forums for its main discussions (outside of Discord, which replaced chat long ago), as most users there do not like the Discussions feature (except for the 5 or so people who hang out in there because mobile restricts forums from existing.)

      How are we supposed to deal with this? All of our game discussions, features, news, and other stuff are handled on the forums, and there's no way our staff team will be willing to move to Discussions. We have little time to try and work up a solution, and we have to account for everyone when coming up with a solution. From what I've heard, the DPL thing is also extremely outdated (another bureaucrat from our wiki stated this in an above reply.)

      I really wish we would have more time before you guys retire the feature. It's only 3 months until the forums get taken down, and that time flies.

        Loading editor
    • Hello, one thing that REALLY ANNOYS me outside of this change is the Login Session Error. I detest this thing, can you please remove it with the other features? It hurts more than it helps.

        Loading editor
    • Look at this blog. For some reason, NO ONE CAN REPLY TO OTHERS. This is not the situation in other blogs. What is going on?

      (If I try to reply to a comment, a Login Session Error without text appears.)

      https://battlefordreamisland.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:ScribbledEggs/There_seems_to_be_a_problem_with_your_login_session;_this_action_has_been_canceled_as_a_precaution_against_session_hijacking._Go_back_to_the_previous_page,_reload_that_page_and_then_try_again.

        Loading editor
    • I'm a frequent wiki editor and I have to say that DPL forums are daunting. The example links in the DPL forums article show exactly what is wrong with it; some very clever people took DPL and were so preoccupied with thinking about whether they could make Forums with it, that they never stopped to think whether they should make Forums with it. Even just replying to a comment means editing the whole page, making sure you sign your edit, etc. Did I mention editing the whole page, which means relying on people not to vandalize discussions now and adding to other editors' workload to clean things up when it does happen? No thanks.

      I do believe that Discussions is the way forward, if the existing Special:Forum is to be retired.

      However, there is a major paradigm difference between Discussions and the Forum, which stems largely from how it is displayed. The Forums are more like a classic Forum where you have an overview of Categories, with each Category leading to an overview of Threads, and each Thread leading to a single page displaying both the submission Post and its Comments.

      Discussions is currently more like a social stream, like facebook/instagram/twitter/etc. You get a long list of Posts and if you only want to see those in certain Categor(y|ies), you have to filter by them. Even then you're still hit with the post with a good chunk of content, possibly a big image, etc., not just the Post (aka Thread) title, so you have to scroll, scroll, scroll. There are clearly advantages to this as otherwise big social media platforms wouldn't be using it, but it's a really poor user experience as far as Forum replacements go.

      However, setting aside some missing formatting options, the ability to easily quote a post/comment, and a few other things mentioned already that are specific to creating a post/comment, I see no reason that Discussions can't be very effectively displayed similar to the way the Forums are, which I think would get rid of the largest part of the aversion to Discussions. If we could get an option (Special:Preferences) to display Discussions in the same style as Forums in addition to the existing social stream style, I think many more people would be on board as it is far less jarring an experience. This means you can ditch the Forums code base, push Discussions as the superior alternative, and would - hopefully - only require relatively minor code changes on your end to display the exact same content in either style.

      Thoughts?

        Loading editor
    • ^ I fully agree with you.

        Loading editor
    • I think that's a wonderful idea; I believe that one of the main aspects deterring users from enabling Discussions and straying away from Forums is just the sheer disorganization and visual appeal of Discussions. It's incredibly hard to navigate and find a thread that you need, and I'm sure that admins and discussions moderators monitoring them would be a different story altogether. I feel that the style that forums are portrayed in is what makes them so efficient for users to grasp onto so quickly. Discussions as they are now seem incredibly detached from the communities and it would be a shame to have the current forums removed while keeping that remoteness.

        Loading editor
    • Great idea! Also, Discussions currently seem seperate from the wiki, in addition to being like a chat, as mentioned above. So it would be wonderful if it could be changed to be more connected with the wiki like forums are. It seems like a great idea to have a preference to choose how it appears, since everyone prefers it differently.

        Loading editor
    • TortoiseCat5 wrote: Great idea! Also, Discussions currently seem seperate from the wiki, in addition to being like a chat, as mentioned above. So it would be wonderful if it could be changed to be more connected with the wiki like forums are. It seems like a great idea to have a preference to choose how it appears, since everyone prefers it differently.

      ... it is not built on MediaWiki. It can therefore not be "connected to the wiki" to the degree that Forums is.

        Loading editor
    • I feel like there should be a way to edit the appearance and theme of discussions if there isn't a way already?

      I don't think it's as not connected to the wiki as before, considering how the feeds design truly made it more wiki-themed.

        Loading editor
    • Good point!

        Loading editor
    • AimeePlaysMSM wrote:

      Thoughts?

      Great Points! I fully agree.

        Loading editor
    • We should be able to add Wikitext to discussions because some wikis have forum games that'd be ruined because of this.

        Loading editor
    • Sonicthehedgehog223 wrote: We should be able to add Wikitext to discussions because some wikis have forum games that'd be ruined because of this.

      At the risk of being repetitive... if this was possible, they'd have done so already. Because people have been asking about it since the beta. Discussions is not built on MediaWiki, so wikitext does not exist. The only level of markup and linking for the moment is in WordPress style.

      As also said above, forum retirement has been on the docket for some time. Adapt.

        Loading editor
    • One thing to keep in mind is that the crowd posting here is likely to be biased in its view. Few who are perfectly happy with Discussions are likely to have any reason to post here; or even read this thread in the first place.


      Okay okay. You have made your point about it being a security risk. That being the case, I would say there is an even stronger case for offering an actual archival option rather than essentially saying "convert to Discussions and hope it doesn't get edited". Unfortunately, it sounds like even that is off the table at the moment.

      Ah. So that is how those letters are determined. I had wondered about that but don't know enough to figure it out on my own.

      Interesting information regarding Discussions images. I'll have to keep all of that in mind for potential later use. Am I correct in assuming that the image "name" in this case is also produced by some hash? In which case, you would need the URL for the new avatar to update it? If so, that would provide some additional information for another thread where a user was asking if it is possible to retrieve past avatars.


      Mira Laime wrote: ...

      ... Regular users can't because they'd otherwise have the power to retroactively remove the foundation for an entire conversation, rendering replies meaningless, or trolling people by switching their original post around later.

      ...

      Yeah. That is one thing I wish talk pages and threaded discussions would have protection against. However, threaded dsicussions are going away and I don't see how any such protection could be abllied to talk pages.


      ... and another link to save for later. Thanks.


      Not sure how this thing about categories came up but yeah, I agree. I am having similar problems with images on the wiki I admin.


      SlyCooperFan1 wrote: ...

      I should make mention of the fact that the actual Announcements feature itself has no such log for users to go back through a wiki's previous announcements, especially those that occurred before the user joined, in case they wanted to see previous important discussions.

      This is the biggist issue I have with Announcements.


      reply to #97 and #98 by Gmo666

      This is done for security reasons and will most likely never be removed. I am willing to bet you haven't logged out of your account in quite some time. Log out and then log back in. That typically fixes the issue. If you need further help with this, start a separate thread.


      I agree with most of what you said. However, I don't think the display is what most people are concerned about. It seems to me that most of the concerns are about what content can be posted.

      As for DPL Forum, my biggest issue is that every little edit pushes a page to the top of the list. Take the Yu-Gi-Oh! wiki for example. They need to update a bunch of links. Okay, use a bot. Uh oh. Now the bot's edits have pushed decade-old discussions to the top of the list; burying a question a new user just posted.


      reply to
      #101 by Duskaa
      and
      #102 by TortoiseCat5

      In addition to what Tupka217 said in #103, see what Mira Laime said in #9 (item #2).


      Sure, it copied the "theme" in terms of appearance. However, in terms of integration with the wiki content, all you have are links. As mentioned earlier, even the images are handled separately. Right now, the only thing it really share is:

      1. user login
      2. "automatic" color theme based on the wiki

      Sure, you can link to pages, but you could do that on an external site as well. As far as I can tell, Discussions is effectively an entirely separate website.

        Loading editor
    • SlyCooperFan1 wrote:

      Mira Laime wrote:

      Sophiedp wrote:

      Mira Laime wrote: It's possible, but would require some engineering. What would you want to use that for?

      SU uses it for doing announcements about the wiki and etc (kinda like the technical update threads here on CC)
      That's an important use case, but it does it need its own category? You could have a general "wiki business" category where anyone can post, but only admin announcements get an actual notification sent out.
      I would like to echo this request. My wiki has an "Announcements" post category in the Community Feed to mimic one of the Special:Forum boards where we would post announcements and allow users to scroll back through the official announcements. As it is right now, any user can post in the Announcements category; one user recently posted "it's my birthday" in there. We would like to be able to restrict at least one category to only admins and mods being able to create topics (not replies; all users should be able to reply as normal). So yes, this would be a helpful feature to have.

      I should make mention of the fact that the actual Announcements feature itself has no such log for users to go back through a wiki's previous announcements, especially those that occurred before the user joined, in case they wanted to see previous important discussions.

      A good point: We're well aware that the one-announcement-at-a-time limit is pretty restrictive and that many admins are missing a better way to inform community members about multiple things. I can't promise there will be a fix soon, but at least it's high on the list of things we'd like to work on once there is available engineering budget. 

      Other well-known issues are how disconnected Discussions "feels" from the rest of the wiki (though we've made some improvements this year with theming that echoes the wikis design and article tagging), and that it doesn't accommodate powerusers, such as many of you are, very well. It's not very comfortable to use if you want to see a lot, be methodical rather than just randomly browse, or if you need to carry out moderator duties. We're not able to address these right now, given all the UCP work our engineers have to do, but at least we are able to make updates to Discussions after, and generally in the future. DPL forums are not likely to receive updates, so if you opt to use those, what there is now is what you get.

      7 GRAND UMP wrote:
      Hi, bureaucrat of the Plants vs. Zombies Wiki here.

      Our community relies on forums for its main discussions (outside of Discord, which replaced chat long ago), as most users there do not like the Discussions feature (except for the 5 or so people who hang out in there because mobile restricts forums from existing.)

      How are we supposed to deal with this? All of our game discussions, features, news, and other stuff are handled on the forums, and there's no way our staff team will be willing to move to Discussions. We have little time to try and work up a solution, and we have to account for everyone when coming up with a solution. From what I've heard, the DPL thing is also extremely outdated (another bureaucrat from our wiki stated this in an above reply.)

      I really wish we would have more time before you guys retire the feature. It's only 3 months until the forums get taken down, and that time flies.

      Why don't staff members want to move to Discussions? Is it that they're less or not at all familiar with it and therefore feel uncomfortable, which could possibly be alleviated if they casually started using Discussions now, while the Forums are still around as a backup? Or are there things they are currently doing as part of their role that they flat-out can't do with Discussions? What are they? Depending on the concrete issues you're facing, Fandom staff may be able to at the very least give advice.

      @AimeePlaysMSM: Thanks for your very detailed feedback on what exactly your community has found to be unhelpful about Discussions! Even though our developers don't have the capacity to work on Discussions right now, it still helps us hone in on those things they really should address first once they do.

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: DPL forums are not likely to receive updates, so if you opt to use those, what there is now is what you get.

      FANDOM not updating DPLForums is understandable, but if the extension itself receives an update will FANDOM update the version available to the individual wikis?

        Loading editor
    • Forge the Hybrid wrote:

      Mira Laime wrote: DPL forums are not likely to receive updates, so if you opt to use those, what there is now is what you get.

      FANDOM not updating DPLForums is understandable, but if the extension itself receives an update will FANDOM update the version available to the individual wikis?

      Probably not until the UCP work is done; or at least not until the MediaWiki update portion of the UCP is done.

        Loading editor
    • Will wikis that have both forums and discussions just receive all the forum threads along with their existing content?

        Loading editor
    • I am not entirely clear on what your question is. Is "their existing content" referring to Discussions content or Forum content.

      Either way, I would guess the answer is that Forum content will be migrated to Discussions and current Discussions content will be left alone.

        Loading editor
    • Correct, we'll copy over all existing Forum content, leaving existing Discussions content as it is. All threads from both will just be combined in one place, none will be lost.

        Loading editor
    • Why don't staff members want to move to Discussions? Is it that they're less or not at all familiar with it and therefore feel uncomfortable, which could possibly be alleviated if they casually started using Discussions now, while the Forums are still around as a backup? Or are there things they are currently doing as part of their role that they flat-out can't do with Discussions? What are they? Depending on the concrete issues you're facing, Fandom staff may be able to at the very least give advice.

      It's just not a feature they like. I don't like it either: it looks too much like Reddit, which if I wanted to use Reddit, I'd go to Reddit. It doesn't have the same feel as forums and is overall not very staff friendly (we can't customize it to the way we can customize forums, and it doesn't even use the same background as the actual wiki.) It also attracts tons of low effort content, which we don't want, and it never goes away (referring to the low effort content, despite the rules against it). And to an even further note, the users of our discussions don't even edit the actual wiki, so there isn't even a familiar userbase to have there.

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: @AimeePlaysMSM: Thanks for your very detailed feedback on what exactly your community has found to be unhelpful about Discussions! Even though our developers don't have the capacity to work on Discussions right now, it still helps us hone in on those things they really should address first once they do.

      I don't know if I would categorize it as unhelpful. Discussions is used in our community, and I'm sure that once the Forums are no more there will be a decent amount of conversion from its frequent users to Discussions instead. It is a useful feature, for the community and Fandom both, and I fully understand the sentiment behind "Casual conversations can be had [in Discussions]."
      At the moment it's not really advertised much in our wiki - then again, neither are our Forums, people just seem to find their way there via word of mouth or curiosity and going through the menus.

      For technical discussions, we're currently looking at using DPL, and/or just sticking to e.g. the Talk pages (it's easy to forget those exist when there's also Forums, Article Comments, and Discussions) for articles where the discussion would be most relevant.

      Those holding on to the ability to use wikitext / templates for their Forum games do not appear to have any other choice - migrating to a different Forum may give them the ability to make rainbow colored text, but that still won't bring back what they're looking for. We'll see what we can do to accommodate them within either DPL or dedicated pages as much as we can. Realistically, a good portion of those community members may be lost.

      I don't think it would be wise for us to suggest DPL as a solution for casual users, which leaves Discussions.
      I can only repeat again that I believe that Discussions is the way forward, and I think Fandom believes this as well. Which to me suggests it's worth the resources needed to capture and retain as many users as possible. You can't please everyone - those asking for wikitext may well be out of luck - but given that what I have outlined can reasonably done with an Article that links to each 'category' (the filtered results) and custom CSS (wasteful though it may be to load a bunch of content only to have a style rule display:none it all into oblivion) there's certainly a subset of users - hopefully also considered to be valuable community members - who can be pleased with relatively minor effort.

      The following is only minimal CSS styling effort on my side and, while it could do with further tweaks, it already 'feels' closer to a Forum style presentation. (or perhaps feels like old.reddit.com vs new.reddit.com)
      Forum: [1]
      Discussions: [2]
      Discussions, styled for compactness: [3]

      Edit: ironic - I broke the thread by referencing those images. My apologies :D Hopefully fixed by turning them into links.

        Loading editor
    • After catching up, I have a few comments.

      • As some people have noticed, Discussions does not fit well with most wikis aesthetically. The reason for this is known by FANDOM and was a conscious choice based on how most customers visit FANDOM: mobile. Discussions was designed as a mobile-first feature and slowly (very, very slowly) adjusted to be a bit more Desktop browser friendly, but there are still several more things that could be done.
      • Thread-based Forums were designed as a desktop-first feature and then basically abandoned. It was also designed to work well with the wiki, and it does. However, because it was basically abandoned engineering-wise, it was never improved or fixed for mobile or anything really. However, since it is wiki friendly, most wiki editors really like it.
      • Wikia/FANDOM wikis are built on an old not-very-mobile-friendly version of the MediaWiki engine and until recently, the decision was to put in the least effort in trying to keep up with the main MediaWiki version that has added many mobile-friendly features and lots of improvements. Because of the old version and basically fear and lack of resources, FANDOM decided to develop features outside the MediaWiki engine that work operationally with the core engine, but barely talk to it, so exist in a sort of sidecar framework.

      Its all pretty complicated, but the short version: Discussions are mobile-first, Forum is Desktop-first, and wikis are mostly Desktop-first with mobile skin and tack ons.

        Loading editor
    • All pretty much correct, yes - except I think you meant to say in your second paragraph Forums were designed desktop-first. That is certainly true and the source of many of these issues. 

        Loading editor
    • I should have said "thread-based Forums", but yeah. Fixed it.

        Loading editor
    • I am just curious.

      1. Do you have a specific example of a Forum game that can't be played using DPL Forum?
      2. I am not clear on what you are trying tog et at with the CSS stuff. I was under the impression that there wasn't a way to apply CSS to Discussions. Perhaps I am jus tmisunderstanding what you are saying?
        Loading editor
    • Andrewds1021 wrote:

      I am just curious.

      1. Do you have a specific example of a Forum game that can't be played using DPL Forum?

      I'm uncertain about games, but one of the wikis where I'm active votes users in/out of positions almost anonymously (I say almost since it's you can disable the css and you get email notifs with usernames even if you don't know how to use the browser tools) via templates and CSS which is far from possible on Discussions.

        Loading editor
    • I see. Then perhaps anonymous polls should be a feature suggestion for Discussions.

        Loading editor
    • Discussion Polls still wouldn't work since the Wiki requires your account to be one month active on this wiki before counting it as a vote, which is why CSS is so useful (The mods can toggle it using dev tools to check if a user is eligible to vote).

      If there was a way for moderators to check which user voted for which option Discussion Polls could be used, but as it stands I believe the current plan is to use DPLforums for things that require wikitext and Discussions for everything else.

        Loading editor
    • Forge the Hybrid wrote: Discussion Polls still wouldn't work since the Wiki requires your account to be one month active on this wiki before counting it as a vote, which is why CSS is so useful (The mods can toggle it using dev tools to check if a user is eligible to vote).

      If there was a way for moderators to check which user voted for which option Discussion Polls could be used, but as it stands I believe the current plan is to use DPLforums for things that require wikitext and Discussions for everything else.

      I don't know how often you hold these votes, but a solution for this could be to hold the vote on a DPL forum or Project: namespace page, and place a link to it in the Discussions thread.

        Loading editor
    • Forge the Hybrid wrote:
      [...]

      If there was a way for moderators to check which user voted for which option Discussion Polls could be used, but as it stands I believe the current plan is to use DPLforums for things that require wikitext and Discussions for everything else.

      There actually is. After you've voted on a poll yourself, you can pull up a list of users who have voted for each option by clicking on that option. Unfortunately, the list doesn't directly link to those users' profiles, but at least you know who voted for what. 

        Loading editor
    • It would be nice if admins and moderators didn't have to vote on a poll to look at its results.

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:

      There actually is. After you've voted on a poll yourself, you can pull up a list of users who have voted for each option by clicking on that option. Unfortunately, the list doesn't directly link to those users' profiles, but at least you know who voted for what.

      I wasn't aware about that, thanks for letting me know! I had only ever used the little "## votes in poll" link at the bottom of a poll. Good to know it's possible.

      Fandyllic wrote:

      It would be nice if admins and moderators didn't have to vote on a poll to look at its results.

      For what it's worth the moderators usually do vote, but yes. It would be nice if they could view who's voted for what w/o voting themselves.

        Loading editor
    • Will templates ever be permitted on Discussions? That's a main concern of mine.

        Loading editor
    • Chase McFly wrote: Will templates ever be permitted on Discussions? That's a main concern of mine.

      Permission is irrelevant. Discussions is not built on MediaWiki. Templates are only a thing on MediaWiki.

        Loading editor
    • Templates require wikitext support to work... Discussions will probably never have wikitext support, thus templates will probably never work.

        Loading editor
    • This feels like a move backwards. Staff have always said, forums will be retired when discussions is ready. It seems like discussions still doesn't meet the needs of many communities, yet forums is now being phased out and you're asking wikis to switch to the old fashioned forums that you yourselves admit are not suitable for inexperienced users?

        Loading editor
    • It’s a small step backwards necessary to take a huge leap forward.

        Loading editor
    • We are not asking wikis to switch to DPL forums. We are pointing out that, for the very specific situations where Discussions doesn't work as a replacement, DPL forums are available as an alternative option. The vast majority of conversations users are having on Special:Forum at the moment can be had in Discussions. 

      After adding article tagging (a feature that the Forums have as well), @ mentions (a feature that the Forums do not have) and text formatting this year, we do consider Discussions ready enough to replace Forums. 

      That doesn't mean it's a perfect feature. It's not, and we know it. We are not done making improvements to it. The crucial point is that Discussions serves the needs of a very large group of users (casual and mobile users) rather well, and it can be improved further. Forums serve the needs of a very small though extremely powerful group of users (you, the admins and powerusers who create our invaluable wiki content, and who predominantly use desktop computers) very well, but they can not be updated. So this is a move we have to make, in order to eventually arrive at a point where we have one feature that serves all user groups.

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:

      After adding article tagging (a feature that the Forums have as well), @ mentions (a feature that the Forums do not have) and text formatting this year, we do consider Discussions ready enough to replace Forums.

      This determination just shows the vast underestimation of wikitext support, not to mention portable infobox markup.

      The biggest problem with Discussions is that it uses way more client-side Javascript to do its thing which makes it slow and finicky (drag selection is super flaky sometimes and styles can often get mixed up). Markup and preview is usually faster and more precise. If Discussions had a markup and preview mode, then I would say it was getting closer to a replacement for Forum. In the very least Discussions needs some table support.

        Loading editor
    • Tupka217 wrote: It’s a small step backwards mecessary to take a huge leap forward.

      That is what is supposed to happen. We won't know until the UCP is complete. Here is to hoping the UCP goes beyond merely meeting expectations.


      Mira Laime wrote: ...

      ... So this is a move we have to make, in order to eventually arrive at a point where we have one feature that serves all user groups.

      If that is the goal, then I seriously doubt Discussions will be around at that point. Yes, Discussions can be upgraded. However, as is pretty much concensus at this point, the chances of getting wikitext in Discussions is all but exactly 0.0%. As long as wikis continue to be hosted using MediaWiki and the primary discussion feature is not (and thus not capable of using wikitext), the primary discussion feature will never be sufficient for admins, powerusers, etc. At best, you would be able to get it down to 2 systems; which we arguably already have between Discussions and DPL Forum. Although, I suppose one could develope a new MediaWiki-based discussion feature that is a bit more "modern" than DPL Forum.


      I hadn't even considered that kind of difference. Definitely a downside for devices with lower specs and/or older devices.

        Loading editor
    •   Loading editor
    • ^

        Loading editor
    • On wikis where forum threads require templates (such as wanting to go back easily to past parts of a forum RP), I guess the templates will just disappear.

        Loading editor
    • Are you referring to when content is transferred over to Discussions, or when Forums are gone and all role-play and conversations will have to take place in Discussions (if the community doesn't move them to DPL forums or talk pages)? In the content migration, templates won't disappear, they'll be moved over so the posts look like they did before in the Forums. They just won't be editable in the same way. 

      For future posts where you would have used a template, but then can't, it's true: You'll need to figure out how to achieve the same results with a much more basic tool set. This will be tricky in many cases, but how exactly it could go really depends on which templates are currently being used for what. 

      Laclale wrote: Archive more old archive please! https://objectshowfanonpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Special:Forum

      I'm not sure what exactly you're saying. Can you elaborate?

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:

      I'm not sure what exactly you're saying. Can you elaborate?

      This. https://objectshowfanonpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Forum:Index

        Loading editor
    • Are you saying you want this DPL Forum un-archived? You'd have to be admin on the wiki to be able to request that. 

        Loading editor
    • Laclale is not an admin on that wiki.

        Loading editor
    • ...

        Loading editor
    • thats ok with me

        Loading editor
    • what about the message walls? I feel like FANDOM is moving way too quickly for anyone to keep up with. They're changing, they're changing

        Loading editor
    • They're retiring message walls and are going to replace them by a newer feature with better code and functionality. Though, all the messages are migrating to the newer version of the message wall, so there's not too much to worry about for the message walls, unlike the Forums, where Forums will be completely retired.

        Loading editor
    • So unlike forums, threads of message walls will be migrated automatically? I hope there will be WikiText for the update.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, or at least that's what I've heard. For wikitext, that would depend if the new message walls will be built from MW or a different engine. If it was built from MW, then wikitext is definitely included. If not, then it's going to end up like Feeds.

        Loading editor
    • All of this was mentioned earlier in this thread but since it seeems some people aren't reading the earlier posts and some misinformation has reared its head again, I am going to repoeat it.

      1. All thread-based discussion features (Special:Forum, article comments, blog comments, and message walls) are unique to Wikia, are not maintainable, and will be removed moving forward.
      2. Each feature will be removed once Wikia has developed what it feels is a viable alternative.
      3. The "viable" alternative for Special:Forum is Discussions. They are still in the design/planning phase for the other replacements.
      4. Migration from a given thread-based feature to its replacement will be automated. If you are happy with the replacement, you don't need to lift a finger.
      5. Migration to any other feature (ex. DPL Forum) is the responsability of the wiki; Wikia does not plan on providing support or an automated script.
      6. Specific to the conversion of Special:Forum
        • All messages will have a final HTML rendering made and that HTML will be what gets posted in Discussions.
        • Because of the limimted HTML whitelist for Discussions (even stricter than that for MediaWiki), content that uses wikitext will, effectvely, not be editable. The reason is that resaving the message will pass it though the content filter (which is bypassed during the migration process). The filter is likely to remove tags that are critical to the appearance of the post.
        • New posts made in Discussions will not be able to use wikitext. This includes the familiar link syntax, images uploaded to the main portion of the wiki, templates, parserfunctions, MeidaWiki table syntaxt, etc.
        Loading editor
    • Thanks for the useful summary, Andrewds1021!

      It bears repeating that content from Special:Forum will not be lost. It will be transferred fully over to Discussions. This will happen automatically. Communities don't have to do a thing to save their Forum content.

        Loading editor
    • What will happen to our edits?

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote: Thanks for the useful summary, Andrewds1021!

      It bears repeating that content from Special:Forum will not be lost. It will be transferred fully over to Discussions. This will happen automatically. Communities don't have to do a thing to save their Forum content.

      Nice. Will any WikiText, even if broken up due to lack of WikiText support, still be fully saved as is? As in if all WikiText still remains exactly as it is written in-code without modification, even if WikiText doesn't show up on Discussions properly?

        Loading editor
    • No, the Forum content is transferred over to Discussions in HTML form. So it'll look the same, templates will appear as they were, but the wikitext markup won't be saved. You won't see the difference, but it would be impossible to later tranlate the posts back into wikitext. 

      @FizzFire: Edits on regular MediaWiki pages are not affected by the Forum retirement. 

        Loading editor
    • Also, one suggestion to add for Discussions:

      • Make it so that typing an in-wiki link in the "Link" typing function will allow an in-wiki link, following the logic of general WikiText.
        Loading editor
    • I believe FizzFire was asking specifically about the edits made to Forum posts. Right now, when I edit a forum post, it counts towards my total edits and shows in places like Special:Editcount/Andrewds1021. I hadn't thought of this before but it is an interesting question. For example, I currently have about 9k edits associated with the Board Thread namespace. When Forum is removed, what happens to those? Do they just disappear; dropping my total edit count by 9k? Do they get moved into some other namespace (probably main)? Do they get added to my Discussion post count; causing me to jump from 0 to 9k overnight?

        Loading editor
    • I have another question I would like to ask. Is it possible to migrate all Forums of a wiki to Discussions and at the same time also add a special "Migrated from Forums" tag or something similar? It would be cool to let fellow users know whether certain posts originated from Forums or Discussions.

        Loading editor
    • If I am understanding the process correctly, a Discussion category will be created for each board. So, in theory, you should be able to tell by which category the post is in.

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:

      No, the Forum content is transferred over to Discussions in HTML form. So it'll look the same, templates will appear as they were, but the wikitext markup won't be saved. You won't see the difference, but it would be impossible to later tranlate the posts back into wikitext. 

      @FizzFire: Edits on regular MediaWiki pages are not affected by the Forum retirement. 

      Just to note, losing the wikitext is a data loss, just not necessarily an important one. I'm also not sure anyone has looked that closely to see if the re-render when generating the archived versions in Discussions hasn't lost data due to intermittent parsing problem. When the mass conversion happens during the official retire of Forum, we'll have to see if there are more problems.

        Loading editor
    • Fandyllic wrote:

      Mira Laime wrote:

      No, the Forum content is transferred over to Discussions in HTML form. So it'll look the same, templates will appear as they were, but the wikitext markup won't be saved. You won't see the difference, but it would be impossible to later tranlate the posts back into wikitext. 

      @FizzFire: Edits on regular MediaWiki pages are not affected by the Forum retirement. 

      Just to note, losing the wikitext is a data loss, just not necessarily an important one. I'm also not sure anyone has looked that closely to see if the re-render when generating the archived versions in Discussions hasn't lost data due to intermittent parsing problem. When the mass conversion happens during the official retire of Forum, we'll have to see if there are more problems.

      Looking at some of the examples above, eg, polls and images, I'd say its kinda important, especially if its all lost as soon as you edit it.

        Loading editor
    • Andrewds1021 wrote:
      I believe FizzFire was asking specifically about the edits made to Forum posts. Right now, when I edit a forum post, it counts towards my total edits and shows in places like Special:Editcount/Andrewds1021. I hadn't thought of this before but it is an interesting question. For example, I currently have about 9k edits associated with the Board Thread namespace. When Forum is removed, what happens to those? Do they just disappear; dropping my total edit count by 9k? Do they get moved into some other namespace (probably main)? Do they get added to my Discussion post count; causing me to jump from 0 to 9k overnight?

      Yes, this is what i want to know.

        Loading editor
    • Discussions edit counts and wiki edit counts are completely separate. As far as I know, Special:Editcount is wiki only.

        Loading editor
    • I don't actually have an answer for that, since the script that will do the migration from Forum to Discussions content isn't written yet. Some details on how it will work still need to be figured out. 

      After the migration, the newly moved posts in Discussions that used to be Forum posts won't have any visual indication that they came from the Forums, but in some cases, you'll still be able to tell. You might see formatting that can't be done with the Discussions editor, you might see templates, you might see posts by anonymous users, which Discussions doesn't allow. Unless admins later re-name and consoliate categories, you may also be able to tell what used to be Forum content via the category the posts are in. 

      We aren't planning on adding any flags like "hey, this used to be a Forum post!", though, since that wouldn't really tell many users anything valuable. 

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:
      I don't actually have an answer for that, since the script that will do the migration from Forum to Discussions content isn't written yet. Some details on how it will work still need to be figured out. 

      That should, uh, be sort of a pressing issue since there's only about 2,5 months left till mid January

        Loading editor
    • Forge the Hybrid wrote:

      Mira Laime wrote:
      I don't actually have an answer for that, since the script that will do the migration from Forum to Discussions content isn't written yet. Some details on how it will work still need to be figured out. 

      That should, uh, be sort of a pressing issue since there's only about 2,5 months left till mid January

      I agree with you, this is not going to work if they decide to move all forum posts to DIS. The best way is to delete everything.

        Loading editor
    • Are you seriously suggesting we just delete the thousands and thousands of Forum conversations, losing them completely, instead of migrating them to Discussions?

      We will keep the Forum content and migrate it over. That's been firmly decided. We have an old script that was used up until last year to migrate Forum content into Discussions, so we know this can be done. This script no longer works since Discussions has changed considerably since that script was last used, but it will be the basis of the new script we'll have to write. 

      This shouldn't take 2.5 months, so we're quite confident that we can answer the questions about the migration process and get things ready to be moved over by mid-January. And even if not: We won't shut down Forums until we're able to preserve the content. 

        Loading editor
    • As long as we have an excellent solution to preserving polls and images, then I am satisfied, and there shouldn't be any backlash.

        Loading editor
    • There is one thing I am still not clear on. During the conversion process, will the threaded post pages actually be deleted or will they be left in place? If they are left in place, users could always go to the pages directly to see the wikitext.


      I would be pleasantly surprised if that doesn't happen.


      The polls used in Forum are part of MediaWiki. So I say the odds of preserving them are close to none. As for images, those are supposedly going to be preserved (#21). Although, I am thinking there might be an issue if the wiki counterpart ever gets renamed. Depending on the specifics of how the images are added to the Discussion post, there might also be an issue with resaving. But that is just speculation on my part since I don't know how the converted images are inserted.

        Loading editor
    • i agree that all the forum threads should be removed when switching 2 discussions

      a lot of threads r spam that still havent been remvoed

      discussions is much more moderated and fresh

        Loading editor
    • It seems that even they don't know how this process will work.

        Loading editor
    • F039A6C4 wrote: i agree that all the forum threads should be removed when switching 2 discussions

      a lot of threads r spam that still havent been remvoed

      discussions is much more moderated and fresh

      You don't have to wait to deal with spam. Those pages can be deleted right now if they are problematic. The reason I was asking is because it seems a few people here are concerned about loosing the wikitext versions. If the pages where the posts are actually stored are left intact, then there would be a way to recover the wikitext. However, if they were to be deleted (as implied by an earlier statement that there will be no trace of the feature left), then there indeed would not be a way to recover the wikitext.

        Loading editor
    • wikitext u mean forum posts cuz discussion posts go in2 "discussions posts" instead of edits but forum posts go in edits

        Loading editor
    • Yes, I mean forum posts.

        Loading editor
    • I'm talking to the developer team that will be taking care of Forum-to-Discussions migrations, to see if we can't find answers to the specific migration questions you've asked, even if they haven't written the actual script yet. I'll report back with the answers once I've got them. 

        Loading editor
    • Is there a possibly timeline?

        Loading editor
    • Mira Laime wrote:

      We won't shut down Forums until we're able to preserve the content. 

      This is re-assuring.

      One thing I guess has not been answered: Are the images migrated from Forum to Discussions copies or links to the original images on the wiki? I'm guessing they are copies, but maybe I'm wrong. This is important, because as Andrewds1021 mentions above, some of those image will show up as unused, if they only live in Discussions and may get deleted because of that. If Discussions is just linking to pre-existing wiki images, then they may get broken if the corresponding wiki image gets deleted.

        Loading editor
    • Back in #21 Mira Laime said they aren't copies. Hence the concern.

        Loading editor
    • Ahh, okay... that was a big reply and I missed that note.

      So, I would suggest that Forum to Discussions migration includes some category tagging of images, so admins can know an image is used in a Discussions archive of Forum content, so they will know not to delete it (think it is unused).

        Loading editor
    • anyone else excited about forum posts being deleted when switching 2 discussions?

        Loading editor
    • Even if there are, why would it matter? Those people probably aren't helping anybody with wiki problems.

        Loading editor
    • I wouldn't say that, exactly. However, I think this thread is self-selecting in its participants so I wouldn't expect to find many supporters posting here.

        Loading editor
    • F039A6C4 wrote: anyone else excited about forum posts being deleted when switching 2 discussions?

      They aren't though, they'll be copied into Discussions posts.

        Loading editor
    • How to deal with images during the Forum-->Discussions migration is actually being discussed at the moment. I made sure to raise the concern about Unused Files in maintenance lists with the team, so they won't overlook this aspect. Hopefully, I'll have some more answers on how exactly the script will work soon. 

        Loading editor
    • There are many of the forums with WikiText. I wish you could've added WikiText when Discussions were even in development.

        Loading editor
    • OKool1470 wrote: There are many of the forums with WikiText. I wish you could've added WikiText when Discussions were even in development.

      That wish shows you don't understand the reality of the development.

        Loading editor
    • Tupka217 wrote:

      OKool1470 wrote: There are many of the forums with WikiText. I wish you could've added WikiText when Discussions were even in development.

      That wish shows you don't understand the reality of the development.

      I know that the threads will be migrated instead of deleted. But will they still count as contributions or will they be discussion points?

        Loading editor
    • OKool1470 wrote:

      Tupka217 wrote:

      OKool1470 wrote: There are many of the forums with WikiText. I wish you could've added WikiText when Discussions were even in development.

      That wish shows you don't understand the reality of the development.

      I know that the threads will be migrated instead of deleted. But will they still count as contributions or will they be discussion points?

      That's not related to your first post.

      As for your new one, it's been answered: it's unknown this early in the process.

        Loading editor
    • Tupka217 wrote:

      OKool1470 wrote:

      There are many of the forums with WikiText. I wish you could've added WikiText when Discussions were even in development.

      That wish shows you don't understand the reality of the development.

      Not really, FANDOM dev made the conscious choice to not support Wikitext, but probably because it was beyond their capability and no other reason.

        Loading editor
    • It is probably a security risk, inefficient, or something but api.php does allow for parsing of any text. I can't give an actual link becuase the wikitext will get parsed, but you can copy-paste the following URL and see for yourself.

      https://community.fandom.com/api.php?action=parse&prop=text&text={{ContactFormLink|type=wiki|text=contact%20staff}}
      
        Loading editor
    • Fandyllic wrote:

      Tupka217 wrote:

      OKool1470 wrote:

      There are many of the forums with WikiText. I wish you could've added WikiText when Discussions were even in development.

      That wish shows you don't understand the reality of the development.

      Not really, FANDOM dev made the conscious choice to not support Wikitext, but probably because it was beyond their capability and no other reason.

      Wikitext is only a thing in MediaWiki (and other wiki software). They built Forums on MediaWiki, but it was such a mess that it is no longer efficient to maintain. So they built Discussion from scratch, not using MediaWiki for a feature it was not designed for. The main purposes are portability and participation, and they've got those. It was not "beyond their capability", it's "in a wholly different plane of existence". Botching together two coding systems is not a sustainable solution.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, that sums it up accurately. It is theoretically possible to make wikitext work in Discussions, but it would lead us right back to a clunky and unsustainable feature. It would be difficult and time-consuming to implement, and the result would carry many potential problems. It would be a bit like retrofitting a car so it can fly. It's probably possible, but you'd really be much, much better served to fly with a plane, which was built from scratch for just that purpose. And if you absolutely had to make a car fly, it would probably be a terribly impractible car for regular driving afterwards.

        Loading editor
    • That may be the case and I don't doubt that the current Discussions feature is more than enough for most users. However, it seems to me that the sticking point for most users involved with this thread is that the proposed "alternative" for those that need wikitext is DPL Forum.

      To go along with the car v. plane analogy, from a user's (customer's) point of view, it is like an airline selling all its jets to buy a bunch of cars. Sure, for those not going very far it might be better (more flexible on times and locations). But for those going far enough to actually need to fly, what do they do? Well, they can book a ticket on one of the remaining turboprops but that is still going to take longer than it used to. Yes, the company is saving on maintenance costs and doesn't have to deal with the complexities of a 787 or A380. But as far as the flying customers are concerned, their service just got downgraded.

      Of course, that is far from a perfect analogy, especially with the UCP that is supposed to majorly benefit powerusers. But it is hard to get a lot of hope from that when it seems like everything is still TBD. This goes for the whole UCP project in general for the moment. Between my own tickets and those of users who looked to CC for help first, I have definitely seen a rise in the number of replies along the lines of "Thanks for letting us know. However we are currently focusing on the UCP and do not have plans to update <feature> as the issues will be automatically solved with the UCP." Is that a correct statement? Probably. Does it make sense to focus on the UCP? Yes. Is it great that Wikia staff are being honest in their replies? Absolutely! Is that a reassuring answer? No; especially when it looks like a lot of things are TBD.

        Loading editor
    • Interesting thing that seems to have happened on the wiki mentioned above whose Forum was disabled completely before moving to Discussions is that a post made by the only user who posted on the wiki's forum still counts in their masthead edit count, but not on Special:Editcount. It also doesn't appear in deleted contributions (unlike their namespace-less deleted blog contributions), so it is entirely possible that the masthead edit count is stored separately and never decreased when a previously made revision is gone from the database. We don't know if this will be the case on the UCP, though, but the issue of preserving the edit count after getting rid of Forum/Wall posts doesn't sound like an issue for Discussions and rather an issue with how the new profile system will be built.

        Loading editor
    • In one of your previous posts (#22), you mentioned that some wikis that converted earlier still have the actual pages. Is that the case with this wiki? If so, perhaps the edit count is tied to the actual page? I am fairly certain that could be one reason for it not showing in deleted contributions. As for Special:Editcount, it could just be an issue with the feature in general. See this thread.

        Loading editor
    • Special:Editcount is full of bugs. It shouldn't be used as a reference for anything.

        Loading editor
    • Hello! I'm ChocoMingo (formerly NESTLEH), the bureaucrat of the Polandball Wiki. I wanted to get things clarified about the Forums. If we contact Fandom to add Discussions on my wiki, will all the Forum posts be transferred/migrated there?

        Loading editor
    • ChocoMingo wrote: Hello! I'm ChocoMingo (formerly NESTLEH), the bureaucrat of the Polandball Wiki. I wanted to get things clarified about the Forums. If we contact Fandom to add Discussions on my wiki, will all the Forum posts be transferred/migrated there?

      I think they mentioned above that as the deadline for the forced relocation of Forum content to Discussions is relatively soon, and the tool they had been using is outdated, they're no longer manually initiating that process - so contacting them wouldn't do anything.

      https://community.fandom.com/wiki/Thread:1746468#21

      Once the deadline has been reached, all Forum content is intended to be transferred - in HTML form - to Discussions instead, with each Forum category becoming its own Discussions category.

      https://community.fandom.com/wiki/Thread:1746468#7

      You can still request Discussions to be enabled, but the Forum content won't be moved over until the deadline.

      Good luck - love me some Polandball!

        Loading editor
    • AimeePlaysMSM is right. My advice would be to have Discussions enabled now, even though your Forum content won't be moved there until January. It gives your community plenty of time to get used to the new feature, while you still have the old one to fall back to. That might make the transition smoother later. 

        Loading editor
    • That seems reasonable.

      Maybe I'll ask about this on the WoF wiki.

        Loading editor
    • will comments move?

        Loading editor
    • Please see reply #150.

        Loading editor
    • PLEASE DONT GET RID OF FORUMS!!!!!!!!!

        Loading editor
    • Moonwatcher663 wrote: PLEASE DONT GET RID OF FORUMS!!!!!!!!!

      That ship has sailed. They're working on a replacement. Please actually read this thread.

        Loading editor
    • I did obviously. I just really don’t want them to get rid of them. God.

        Loading editor
    • And you think that will help?

        Loading editor
    • No, but I would like a chance.

        Loading editor
    • Don’t discussions give notifications to everyone

        Loading editor
    • #FORUMSFOREVER
      
        Loading editor
    • Think it might be time to lock this thread, most (all?) of the questions have answers and nothing constructive is being added at this point. We should be getting a new UCP blog post soon anyway, per MisterWoodhouse's comment on This Month at Fandom - October 2019 which should reveal more details:
      We're working on the next one now. I don't have a publication date scheduled yet, but it's Soon!

      (2 days ago, currently on the second page of comments. #comm-1755290)

        Loading editor
    • @Moonwatcher663 deal with it

      i honestly think discussions r better than this stupid forum

        Loading editor
    • Forums are, in my opinion, much better

        Loading editor
    • ur entitled 2 have ur opinion

        Loading editor
    • Thank you for the civil conversation

        Loading editor
    • ur welcome

        Loading editor
    • It's a nice change, to actually see people being nice. My opinion is that the forums are more versatile and interesting, but outdated.

        Loading editor
    • #FORUMSFOREVER #FORUMSFOREVER #FORUMSFOREVER #FORUMSFOREVER
      
        Loading editor
    • I'm closing this thread since it seems we've run out of new, relevant questions to discuss. 

      There are a few I haven't been able to answer properly yet - like what happens to images in the migration - and I'll reopen the thread to post updates on those once I've got them. 

        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.