This Forum has been archivedVisit the new Forums
|Forums: Index → Community Proposal → Partnership with Aegis7|
- The wiki should disable the Blog feature provided by Wikia. For those wanting to blog, wiki users would need to migrate to Aegis7.
- The wiki would disable the General Discussion category of the wiki forum. Thus, for any general discussion, wiki users would need to migrate to Aegis7. The Support Requests and Community Proposal categories would stay as they are essential for the wiki maintenance.
Aegis7 uses a standardised forum feature that you can find in any other forum site. The site also provides users the ability to blog.
The only issue with this partnership is that the information/user settings will not be transferred to either site; in other words, you would need to create a new account and that anything you post here will not be recorded there and vice versa.
I hate change but I will accept this.General Q-Nek 21:27, June 29, 2012 (UTC)
Is a good Idea: the wiki is a "information base" aegis 7 "is a forum", the union is a great change for all Tricell 00:39, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
Siin here, a moderator of Aegis7. Might I suggest those who see this do a quick lurk of our site to check out the forum and blog features we have. See what you think! --- FatherSiin 04:59, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
MindlessMe here from the Aegis7 forums. I am one of the admins over there and I am glad to see that people are excited about the idea. We have some pretty awesome features that I believe the community here at DS Wiki would like. I highly recommend that you try them out on the site and get a feel for how things work over there. Also when you do make a profile please PM myself or Augrunt so that way we can give you the group tag that we made for you. If you have any questions feel free to let us know!! --- MindlessMe 10:54, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
I believe I speak on behalf of the administrative staff of DS Wiki in asking when the diplomatic missions, contract signing, public handshaking and formal dinners will commence between our governing bodies in commemoration of this forthcoming alliance. --LBCCCP 16:27, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
Alright, my alliance-making skills might be a bit rusty, but I don’t think they’re too old fashioned. Anyways, first thing is we need to exchange hostages to ensure diplomatic trust, after which we can begin arranging a marriage between members of each of our families. Subtank’s threatened to do me grievous bodily harm should I try and marry her to another prospective alliance-partner so… LBCCCP? Ready to take one for the team? --Haegemonia(talk) 16:44, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
Well I guess since we are going this route I will set the terms in place for the first born of the top 5 families be gathered for negotiating the deal. We will of course need equal trading on your part as well since our children are very strong from birth. Think it's something in the water... --- MindlessMe 20:07, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
I understand the logic of arranging marriages to ensure trust among the stakeholders in this business ventures. If Subtank must be married in order to foment diplomatic confidence, I will take the hit. How fortunate we are to have a high ranking female member among us! However, over here in Mother Africa we are fond of matrimonial dowries. To commence bidding, I am willing to part with two cows and one water buffalo which would be given to Subtank's parents/parents' tribe. As for children exchanging, MindlessMe, we could do a secret santa or blind raffle. --LBCCCP 20:37, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
No-no-no-no LBCCCP, you wouldn’t be marrying Subtank, you’d be wedding someone from the Aegis 7 forums; and since its customary for the family with the older lineage to provide the female (well, at least in some Highlander, Gaulish, Scandinavian, and Russian traditions), we’ll need you to fill in for that particular role. We’re not asking you to do anything weird, just maybe wear a dress, maybe a bit of blush. You know, look pretty.
Sounds like thinks are starting to happen over here. Being the newest member of staff over on Aegis7, I feel that I must prove my worth. Therefore, I will take the hit that LBCCCP describes and marry... her. And if to follow by... her dowry, I am willing to part with my younger brother (a fit lad), and acre of farmland which can be recultivated to suit any needs. LBCCCP, do you accept? -- FatherSiin 23:45, June 30, 2012 (UTC)
Oh, it's just me nonchalantly making people talk about Noemon marrying a member of the Aegis 7 forums as a woman as per a long-defunct marriage custom. You know, leaving another golden apple and such. --Haegemonia(talk) 21:19, July 1, 2012 (UTC)
lol. This sidetracked really fast... Should we organise a Skype chat when possible?
Austgrunt 13:00, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- I think video/voice-chatting is really out of the question given that all of the administrators are in different timezones and would not be able to participate in that discussion. The best way for this proposal is via text-chat, such as the one we're having right now. Anyway, back to the proposal (starting new section).— subtank (7alk) 14:32, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
Comments on proposal
Once again, I support the partnership with Aegis7. There's not a lot of Dead Space fansites (with a big population). To partner up with a fansite would improve this population count and the franchise.
As for disabling the two features, I am at a crossroad; I don't really see why we need to disable either features for the sake of this partnership for these two reasons:
- The General Discussion category is also used by the administration for wiki-related discussions (i.e. gathering feedback on improving the wiki, giving out informal announcements, warnings to users on editing), hence General Discussion. Yes, all those examples fall within General Discussion and not Community Proposal (proposals such as this one) or Support Request (which is for technical issues accessing the wiki, which happens every now and then).
- The Blogs is used as a platform for formal announcements by the administration (such as my monthly wiki updates [Noemon, you should do this! :D] and Haege and Gorvar's year-long review of Downfall]). Even Wikia Staff uses this feature to announce any Wikia-related news on events, features, and what-not.
I understand of the concept of "one community" as put by MindlessMe on Aegis7 but I don't see why we can't be that "one community" offering different systems of forum and blogging on different sites. Dead Space Wiki would be "the wiki for Dead Space information" or the "Wiki Community" while Aegis7 would be "the forum site for Dead Space fans" or the "Forum Community". If a user feels the need to edit a wiki, they know where to go. If a user feels the need to discuss something, they can start a forum in this wiki but they would be informed that they could gather a better response at the forum site (by promoting it via this wiki's forumheader since Aegis7 offers a better forum system). If a user wants to blog, they can use both sites' blogs to get even responses.
Again, this is simply my opinion. Since this is a community-vote proposal and not an administration-vote proposal, it is up to the community to decide whether or not these two features should be disabled.— subtank (7alk) 14:32, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- Exactly this, Subtank for president :P . If we think the "one community" concept as a small town, where the DS:W is the pub where everyone goes to drink and play darts and watch the occasional football (instead of pub, you can also think of Moe's Tavern), and the Aegis7 is the, I don't know, Games Corner, where people go to play bowling, darts, videogames, and also has a big ass Plasma TV, asking to close the forums and blogs, is like asking from the pub to only offer booze. "I'm sorry gentlemen, you can roll in the dirty pits of alcoholism all you want but you can certainly not be entertained while you do so! Now, who ordered the beer?"
- I also want to propose the added clause that, if/when the collaboration becomes reality, we should no longer allow fanfictions here as the DS:W will become the least appropriate place (between DS:W, the Aegis7 and the Fanfiction Wiki) for one to put fanfictions any more. --Noemon *talk* 15:40, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- I digress, technically we don't allow non-parody fanon on this wiki anyways, but we've been lax in enforcing it. Personally, I blame Subtank, as you can't depend on Koreans, even when living in the land of tea, crumpets, and lamp-post loving (technically, I don't know whether Subtank is of Korean ancestry/origin, but I'm guessing as she says she's Asian and her various idioms and grammatical quirks indicate a socio-linguistic background from the Korean peninsula. Or perhaps I'm totally wrong and just talking bollocks). --Haegemonia(talk) 16:40, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- I think the worry (well, my worry) about one community offering two different systems is the fact that we won't be directed to each other's sites. From experience, what people tend to do is use what they're familiar with and stick to it. As an example: As you said, subtank, if the user (A) feels the need to discuss something, they'll start something from here, the DS:W, and instead of another user (B) directing the question to Aegis7's forums for more help, they'll more than likely just answer the question. Or B tells A to direct the question to us for more information, they may not want to because they're used to here and they don't know our site. Therefore, rendering our forum and the connection between us useless.
- I don't mean to step on toes about this at all, but I think having the "one communty offering two different systems of forum and blogging" doesn't exactly create a partnership other than "We have a tiny link to your site, and you have a tiny link to ours." In my opinion, it doesn't accomplish anything.
- 1. Your General Discussion category being used for announcements is understandable, but over at Aegis, we have an entire forum section dedicated to anything about the Wiki. We haven't used it too much, but I bet we could purge the subforum so it can be used by everyone for wiki based discussions.
- 2. The Blogs I can understand to keep for monthly weekly updates, but I think for general users they should be directed to Aegis7's Blogs, instead of using DS:W blogging system. That just makes more sense to me.
- Again, just my personal opinion on the matter. I just wanted to get it out there. -- FatherSiin 17:41, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- Just to clarify my opinion on this, a little, personally I have no problem to completely substitute out general discussion forums with the forums of Aegis7, as we would be replacing a sub-par forum-ish thing, with an actual forum. My objection lies with the closure of the blogs, because REALLY, I don't think that the blog system of Aegis7 offers any substantial improvement, over what we've got here, in order to justify the closure of the blogs here, and this is where I agreed with Subtank. --Noemon *talk* 20:06, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- I think the reason for the closure of the blogs here is if the forums are going to close, then what you will have is a wiki and blogs. The combination of the two doesn't fit, to me. We may not have an extreme improvement over yours, but I do believe it to be a bit more organized, linked and displayed on the website as a whole, and is already linked to each individual user by default. We're not saying yours is a terrible system, I just believe it to make more sense to have the combination of Forum, Blogs, Articles, and then a Wiki rather than Forum, Blogs, Articles, and then Wiki and Blogs. -- FatherSiin 20:23, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- The whole "one community, two systems" would work if we can simply amend the policies and enforce it strictly for the sake of the partnership: general discussions in the wiki would be strictly for wiki-use only (that is, for wiki improvement on feedback and what-not) and that all other discussions would be replaced with a notification reminding users to move to Aegis7 for all general discussions. The same also goes for the blogs. It would be obvious to visitors/readers that this site is a wiki for a community of a franchise and not a forum/blog site.
- Again, if the users prefer using the wiki features, we would allow it in so far that they follow the policies and guidelines. We've made great progress in enforcing them (aside from no-fanon policy which will be discussed in a later date) and I don't see why we can't enforce this for the sake of the partnership.— subtank (7alk) 21:55, July 2, 2012 (UTC)
- AEGIS 7
- Proposed: Aegis 7 will delete and purge the Aegis 7 wiki to be replaced with The Dead Space Wiki via “Wiki” top link.DS:Wiki will also have its own forum for discussing anything wiki related. The forum is already there so there just have to be minor changes made. Admins from the wiki will have correct privileges so they can monitor the DS:Wiki forum.
- Reasoning: Aegis 7’s wiki is meager compared to The Dead Space Wiki. Having a super link from Aegis 7 to Dead Space: Wiki will create more traffic when users ask questions easily found in the Wiki.
- DEAD SPACE: WIKI
- Proposed: DS: Wiki will remove all forums from DS:Wikia site and use Aegis7 as a primary source of forums. All forum links and related links should direct the user to the Aegis7 site.
- Reasoning: Aegis 7 has a superior Forum system compared to Dead Space: Wiki’s “wiki-style” forum. Users should no longer used the Dead Space: Wiki for Forum posts, but should be directed via the Community Portal to Aegis 7 to use its tools.</span>
- Proposed: DS:Wiki will use the Wikia blog for Wiki development topics ONLY. All off-topic and personal blogs should be directed to Aegis7.
- Reasoning: Aegis7 blog system is built in to the profiles and forums that are managed on the site. Moving blogs to Aegis7 will allow the comunity better access to blogs that are posted.
Also the "Join the Forums" on the frontpage should be converted to use our RSS feed.
These are the terms that have been agreed on by the admins at Aegis7.
- What are your thoughts on this? --- MindlessMe July 3, 2012 12:09 (UTC)
I see the reasoning in Aegis 7 purging its wiki section in favour of the Dead Space Wiki, but I agree with Subtank that the removal of the forums here would be somewhat unnecessary and a hinderance to being able to quickly address internal issues. I do, however, move to start enforcing the non-parodical fanfiction in the forums rule. --LBCCCP 03:31, July 4, 2012 (UTC)
Can someone please define what is the # of votes required for/against from the community that will result in either an acceptance or decline of the proposed terms as set above by MindlessMe on July 3rd, 2012.
- How many people from the Wikia need to vote for it be considered community consensus?
- There are two proposals wrapped into one, will you take voting on both as a whole or indvidually?
- What is the deadline for voting? How are you going to ensure your whole community is aware of the vote?
Austgrunt 04:58, July 4, 2012 (UTC)
Answers are as follows:
- Total required number will be based on traffic to the site, with adjustments made based on frequent users; approval will be based on a simple majority, though in cases where the community is almost evenly split (50 +/- 5%) we may hold additional voting sessions or utilize moderators as tie-breakers as needed.
- Since each part of the proposal involves major changes to the wiki, each proposal will be voted on separately.
- Announcements will be made on the main page and deadlines will be based on traffic rate to ensure enough people get a chance to vote.
If you have questions about technical specifics, ask Noemon or Subtank, for more general things however feel free to use me as a resource in addition to the aforementioned. --Haegemonia(talk) 05:29, July 4, 2012 (UTC)
Then let's get started. When will this commence? Austgrunt 05:48, July 4, 2012 (UTC)
Right then. I'll let you guys figure out what you wish to do. Our proposal stands without modification :) Austgrunt 02:37, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
So are we having an EU - Iran style breakdown in negotiations at the moment?--LBCCCP 14:31, July 7, 2012 (UTC)
No, no, nothing as bad as that. Although, strangely enough, Liu Weimin did send me an e-mail telling me that China firmly opposes any one wiki enacting unilateral sanctions against another party.