Forum:Was the move a bad idea?

Forums: Index > The World that Never was > Was the move a bad idea?

AlVan - I'm the leading man, you know. TALK - {{{time}}} I've been looking at the old site and...it looks more cleaned up than this one. It also has more users. So now, I must ask; Would we have been better off if there never was a move?

Check Recent Changes. We've got more mainspace edits, which is really all that matters. --Ag (Silver) - 47 107.8682 amu ~Crono 16:27, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

We don't have to use Oasis anymore, and readers don't have to see Oasis when they read. Yeah, as Crono hinted on, we've got the harder workers at this wiki, while the rest stayed at wikia. We no longer have wikia staff breathing down our necks either, which is definitely a plus. I have no idea where you got "more cleaned up" from. Chitalian8 16:43, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

I meant some of our pages are kinda blank and they have more that are finished. My best example Is battle missions. P.S. If something I put down on the forum it's because I'm on my iPod instead of computer.

Wikia's editors are also very disorganized, look at their recent forums. Many of their edits are to the user talk space, and plus, our version of Battle Missions will be superior to theirs. Chitalian8 18:21, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

I just need to say this; Hell no. User:Erry/Sig4 19:09, 6 May 2011 (EDT)

LapisScarab - You accept darkness, yet choose to live in the light. So why is it that you loathe us who teeter on the edge of nothing? We who were turned away by both light and dark - never given a choice? TALK - That may be... however, what other choice might we have had? The Mission articles didn't magically become blank because we moved. If they're incomplete, that means we hadn't finished them while we were a part of Wikia. A Wiki is virtually never "finished"; there's always going to be edits and changes and improvements to pages, whether we're on Wikia or not. And of course there's a different number of editors; we're seperate Wikis now. We don't have the same number of editors as the Zelda or Bleach Wikis either, but the number of editors doesn't matter, since the quality of the edits are good. Basically, the flaws you've attributed to the move are actually just typical things to find on a Wiki. They have nothing to do with our split from Wikia.

I response to your points:

• A page with less content is definitly not a bad thing. Most of the "new content" on the Wikia wiki is speculation, which is bad.
• True, Wikia is hauling in a large majority of the new users, but that doesn't matter. If you check this, at the very bottom, you will notice that we have at least 50 users that have made a total of 600 edits have editted here since the site was set up.
• No. In no possible way was it a bad idea. The problem with Wikia wasn't really about Oasis. While that was a big part of it, it was more about the fact that Wikia wouldn't listen to its users, the ones who made its bloody content. They constantly forced inappropriatly crappy updates on us, and we had enough.

KRCCFNF is tired of being STEPPED ON. 21:33, 6 May 2011 (EDT)