Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-27157617-20141215235817/@comment-4832338-20141221194022

Mumbo Jumbo II wrote: It's not like I could help you not knowing about this. Just don't be delusional and deny the fact, even though you can research it to prove that others have experienced problems with Wikia. I'm not saying that's not the truth. However, other regular users here never complained about Wikia before. Our wiki's layout is designed to go hand in hand with Wikia's default style; moving to a different wiki service would demand extra work on our part to adapt the wiki's templates. One of the most common praises we get from newcomers is how functional and good-looking our layout is. That hardly implies users are discontent with the layout options of Wikia. Mumbo Jumbo II wrote: I know this sounds like (un)soliciting to you, but I have a personal problem with Wikia and want to give anti-Wikians the fair opportunity to edit South Park Wiki. Well, your personal problems with wikia are that, personal. Just because you aren't fond of Wikia doesn't mean you can come and try to force the others to think in the same way as you. Mumbo Jumbo II wrote: Because to be frank, there are a lot of them, and they aren't newbies at editing. Who? Are they editors here? Mumbo Jumbo II wrote: Another notable example of a moved wiki is Super Smash Bros. Wiki, which moved to SmashWiki. The latter is doing much better than the former. Hell, SmashWiki has 3,419 articles compared to Smashpedia's 2,294 articles. Forked wikis can be successful. That's great, but just the fact that SmashWiki is slightly more popular than Smashpedia doesn't mean the fork was a good idea. Starting with two different wikis with identical content will inevitably cause a split. Both wikis still have active editors; that's not the ideal scenario. Some editors on Smashpedia probably chose it over the ShoutWiki counterpart purely because they prefer Wikia to ShoutWiki. As a simple example, if I were to see two wikis with comparable sizes on Shoutwiki and Wikia, I'd likely opt for the Wikia one as I'm more used to the settings here. Mumbo Jumbo II wrote: ShoutWiki has a different style of MediaWiki. Wikia uses a customized MediaWiki. So? 'Different' doesn't mean 'better'. Mumbo Jumbo II wrote: And among ShoutWiki's features that Wikia does not offer (information sourced here) are these. This might sound like advertising, so be aware:

It doesn't 'sound like advertising'. It is blatant advertising. Which is against our rules. You're doing something you clearly know is wrong. Mumbo Jumbo II wrote: Now I'm not going to try and be hasty, because I don't want to mess up my relationship with the users on this wiki and ruin the possibility of a moving wiki. HP Bloodshed is considering this, Nightquest. One user cannot make their vote look as if it were the ultimate over other user's votes. That's unfair. HP Bloodshed said he wanted to discuss this with other administrators before giving a definite answer to you. Both Aguziel and I are against the idea, which means the majority of the administration doesn't accept changing to ShoutWiki. I singlehandedly cannot prevent other users from forking the wiki's content, as long as they credit the original authors of the articles. I'm just making it clear that I won't be participating in a forked wiki should that situation arises.
 * More available skin customizations
 * Significantly fewer adverts (this can be circumvented on Wikia with adblock. Wikia uses adverts for revenue)
 * ShoutWiki deletes a wiki upon request while Wikia doesn't. If users advertise the new wiki (like I'm doing), staff blocks and desysop editors who advertise the new website. Why? Because they want all of the editing here.