Forum:Finding alternative hosting

Let's just dispense with the pleasantries, shall we? It comes down to this: We need a "plan B."

Wikia, in their "infinite wisdom" (pauses to let the snickers die down) has just said, "fuck you, people who create our content!" and have decided to dictate how our pages are going to look beyond the sidebars. They're intruding into the main article area with nasty, ugly ads and apparently nobody cares what we think about it.

So before this comes down without warning or consent from us, like EVERY SINGLE THING WIKIA HAS EVER DONE, we need to brainstorm where this wiki is going to find a host that actually gives a damn about us beyond the ad revenue we generate.

Now I understand why WhiteBoy never gave up wookieepedia.com. Good call, Chad.

Anyway, this is just an open forum for brainstorming. I'm leaving it unlocked since Havac is currently in his unable-to-login phase and in case Wikia people want to come in and apologize for having even considered such a boneheaded move. Please discuss. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 01:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

=Discussion=
 * I wouldn't be surprised if making a bunch of alternate strategies that would still fulfill Wikia's apparent needs would help to convince Staff that this isn't necessary. I casually mentioned one such idea on their forum. if anyone else has any, please, feel free to post them in Forum:Wikia's New Style. Also, please let them know how you feel about all this; I certainly decided to. I think it's time we remind Wikia that they claim to be a community-oriented website provider. Graestan ( Talk ) 02:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I had the feeling that this was going to happen. It's one reason I kept WikiFur.com, and why I've been registering WikiFur as a service mark. You might want to consider doing that yourself with "Wookieepedia" to substantiate your claim over the use of it to provide a service. If you do, sooner is probably better than later. (Lucasfilm did make a provisional application in the information service trademark class (041) for "Wookiee", but it was abandoned without registration years ago.)

As for hosts, NearlyFreeSpeech.net? They have what seems like reasonable pricing. To my knowledge they don't use the "throw everything on crappy underpowered servers" approach that some of the flashier/flat rate/commission-loving hosts do. --GreenReaper(talk) 03:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I just want to briefly voice my opinion of this new format from the eyes of someone who writes some of the content of what comprises Wookieepedia's articles. It's clear the brass behind this bonehead move doesn't understand that this is that bad of an idea. As much as the "Staff" runs Wikipedia, they need to understand that we are Wikipedia, the people who actually work hard to edit, write and create articles. We, the people who create and maintain this wiki, reject this idea, and yet our voices are falling on deaf ears. Don't stick a spoonful of garbage down our throats without our consent. Instead, we're being told that it's too bad, that those who might leave after pouring countless hours of work into the wiki will just be collateral damage, because there will always be more people to rape. Way to take care of your own. And that's not even beginning to touch upon how this will negatively impact the actual content of the article, which we write.


 * This is part of the reasoning a certain Staff member claims for making this move: "Overall, we feel that the changes will improve the health and growth of the entire Wikia community by converting more viewers into contributors to make our communities more vibrant." What you really mean to say is that the first thing we want people looking at when they open up a wiki article is an advertisement, so that we can make more money. Trust me, Staff, this is coming from an avid wikian, when someone opens up a page to read an article, the first thing they want to see is not an advertisement for Hannah Montana. They want to see the content of the page they opened up to read. You're shooting yourselves in the foot with this one. I guess all I can say is that I hope Monobook survives this foolishness. Toprawa and Ralltiir 03:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Regarding monobook. GHe (Talk) 03:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Welp... that will effectively seal my fate. The Monaco skin freezes and crashes my browser on a regular basis, making editing and anything else almost impossible.  I really like it here, too, I don't wanna be forced out by browser errors...   Trak Nar  Ramble on 04:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I feel like copy/pasting what I posted just as a voice of the average user schmoe, borrowing a line from Toprawa: Ads? In the middle of articles?! Big, ugly banner ads that serve nothing than to be a nasty pus-filled stye on what was a pristine article?!! And for whatever reason, some coorporate fatcat thinks this is a good idea?!!? Coming from the average user/forumgoer, I can tell you one thing's for certain and that is the average user does NOT give a Rodian's antennae about ads. They don't click on 'em. Ads are an eyesore, plain and simple. Putting the ads within the page contents will only serve to drive away viewers and contributors who hate having their hard work dissected with some glaring obnoxious ad for something that's totally unrelated to the content of the article. That's like slapping a kitschy bumper sticker across an Alex Ross original. That's something you just don't do. This "new style" will only serve to aggrivate and alienate and effectively destroy the integrity of the community. In short, bisecting articles with ads has gotta be the most ridiculously idiotic marketing descision I have ever heard, ever. Why don't they just shoot themselves in the foot, it'd acheive the same effect.

I could've added more, but I felt I should stop there lest I got nasty. I might be pushing it with calling Wikia staff "coorporate fatcats." As for alternative hosting... I'm dependent on Geocities, so I have no ideas. I just wanted to bitch.  Trak Nar  Ramble on 04:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Damnit...per everyone above. I'm going to have to relish these next four days. -- Joe Butler (Obi Maul12)  (Chow) 04:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You're darn right that it was the right call to keep your domain name- as an admin of the Creatures Wiki I can tell you what might of happened had you not grabbed it. Check out the WHOIS for creatureswiki.com, which for obvious reasons we were looking into acquiring:

Domain Name: CREATURESWIKI.COM Created on: 17-May-07 Expires on: 17-May-09 Last Updated on: Administrative Contact: Davis, Michael domains@wikia.com Wikia, Inc.

Yes, sports fans, they bought the primary domain name we would want without telling us and are holding it. What possible innocuous motive could they have for this? Adding insult to injury, they don't even forward it to our wiki. Nice, huh? ElasticMuffin 05:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Sithspit, this whole deal smells worse than an overcrowded ronto stable. Kriffing hell, Wikia, what gives? You get bought out by some soul-less multinational corporation whose main products are breakfast cereal and toilet paper?-- Goodwood  ( Alliance Intelligence ) 06:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * An overcrowded ronto stable during mating season with a buncha trapped Rodians who were supposed to be shovelling the knee-high piles of crap, but ended up getting cornered by a herd of ronto males who wanna sex 'em up. Now THAT'S stinky!  God, I need to sleep more...   Trak Nar  Ramble on 07:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd really appreciate if nothing aside from constructive arguments and helpful suggestions were left on this page&mdash;while I am sure everyone is very apt to dump on Wikia for this, I see the issue as something unfortunate and not malicious. If we can find a way to help the Staff to understand what this does to our functionality, we may achieve our goals. But colorful metaphor and downright slander won't help; rather, it will make it all the easier for them to write us off as a bunch of trolls. Graestan ( Talk ) 12:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that Graestan :) Not that we would consider this trolling... we absolutely understand that people are angry and worried, and we are listening.  So, I'm not sure if you want to discuss the changes here, of if you would feel that's rail-roading a discussion on alternatives, but maybe I can answer a couple of points and then let you point me to the right place?
 * Starting from the last part... please note the date on that domain purchase - over a year ago. One of the wikia guys regularly goes though lists of search-terms that lead to Wikia wikis, and typos that people commonly make when trying to get here.  Then he buys any domain names that he thinks would be particularly harmful if they were bought by cybersquatters.  There is nothing underhand, or even very interesting in this.  It's just part of routine, sensible, site management.  Although, I admit I'm quite pleased that we missed doing this for Wookieepedia.org ;)
 * On the more general discussion about the changes, I've just talked to some of you on IRC, so forgive me for repeating some of that here. What this is all about is finding a way to show the sort of adverts that advertisers want to buy from us, while keeping the annoyance to users to a minimum.
 * We did a lot of research into what advertisers will buy, and put a lot of thought in to how to minimise the effect ... including excluding as many types of pages as possible from showing any ads, adjusting the set up to make our regular users see less ads, and making changes that allow flexibility (for example, if there is a table that would break with the box ad, then it automatically shows a banner ad instead).
 * I would be surprised if everything stays the same as you see in the mockups, it's going to need tweaking as we talk to people and see what works on the live sites. But we do need advertising space, and in a form we can sell.
 * So I ask you to look at the changes, especially as things start to go live next week, and talk to us about what you see and how we can make it work. I will be clear here, and say "no ads" or "go back to how Monobook was" or even "go back to Quartz" isn't going to be possible.  But I also trust that we can find a path that will make Wikia a long-term success.  -- sannse (talk) 15:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid "isn't going to be possible" doesn't cut it. We as communities require a certain level of service from our hosting provider. Either Wikia is willing to provide it - for free or at a reasonable cost - or it is not. We are not willing to be hosted under the conditions currently proposed; not for free, not even if Wikia started paying us.
 * As for the domain names, the test for that is whether or not Wikia is willing to transfer them to the rightful service mark owners - the wiki administrators. We would be glad to reimburse Wikia for the reasonable expenses incurred in acquiring them . . . without telling us. --GreenReaper(talk) 21:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ...but it seems like that's not gonna happen, is it? --GreenReaper(talk) 03:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Timing
From the continuing attempts at doublespeak without actually addressing the problem, it's becoming more and more apparent that moving is a better option. All we want is to have ads outside the content space, and that's obviously exactly what Wikia is not going to give us. And I think that ideally, we should have this settled before August 15, so the impending traffic surge from The Clone Wars directs their effort where it belongs, which is on whatever host doesn't randomly spamify our articles. So let's step it up, admin-types! -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 20:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If done, this is obviously going to be something that needs community/administrator consensus. It also needs to be done fast. Maybe step up the next Mofference and make it an emergency one? Yrfeloran 21:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * While I doubt this particular offer is a viable option, offers for free hosting elsewhere have been made, fwiw. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 21:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

"doublespeak"... I'm not sure how to respond to that when we have tried to be very clear about what's happening and why. Please read Danny's reply to some of the initial responses to this at Wikia:Forum:Wikia's New Style, I think he says everything I would there. This has been one of "my" wikis for quite a while now, in that it's one I check regularly to see if any help is needed, hang out in the IRC channel to be available, and generally consider it my job to look after you all. So, change is needed, change is happening, but I am very much here to talk about it, listen, and try to find way to make it less painful for us all -- sannse (talk)
 * Sannse and I have been discussing some of this stuff in detail, since I firmly believe that a move away from Wikia is not the best direction for Wookieepedia right now. Sannse, and other Staff members, are always open to suggestions, thoughts, ideas, etc. on ways to improve what is going to happen. I may not have approached them the best way in the past with regards to this, and may not have tried to understand both sides of the ordeal, so I apologize for that. My goal with this entire thing is to do what is best for Wookieepedia in our current situation. That being said, right now it is hard for most users to look at the changes which will come, since the release hasn't...well...been released yet. What I suggest is that everyone take a step back, look at what has been provided in ways of information by Wikia on the new releases, and come up with suggestions or thoughts on how to improve the situation, if at all. This will be easier once the new Monaco design is released within the coming days, but I don't want to see the community get up in arms any more than it already is, and to continually put their/our foots in their/our mouths. We need to go about this properly, and not personally attack the staff, etc. They are more than willing to listen to anyone, as long as it's done in a mature and civil manner. Now, for anyone who has spoken with me, I don't believe that this new design is needed; however, today when I approached her, Sannse was been willing to listen to my concerns, and like I said, her and I have been able to speak about this stuff and discuss what was on my mind. Just remember that the Staff are human too; just like you don't enjoy it when a troll yells/swears/personally attacks you, they don't view personal attacks, yelling, or swearing at them to be necessary to communicate with them. So, please remember that suggestions/comments/ideas are always welcomed, in fact craved by a lot of staff, but please do so in a civil manner. Past that suggestion, I don't think there is much more I can say at this time. Thanks, Greyman ( Talk ) 21:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * What's to discuss? Give us a proper rectangle-shaped content area without ads inside it. That's the universal concern here, and they're still saying that's not what we're getting. -- Darth Culator  (Talk) 21:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Like I said right above here, suggestions, layout ideas, etc. are welcomed. I've already sat down and spoke with Sannse about what they are looking for, and I offered up some ideas for it which not effect the article content as much, or at all. I put a little bit of work behind my concerns with them, rather than just saying what I think would work. I got their reasons why (which Danny and others have already stated) and then I worked around that. Anyways, if you have ideas of how to make your suggestions work, then I believe that Sannse would be willing to see them and pass them along. Again, if you're going to understand exactly what needs to be done, and within what boundaries, just approach Sannse via PM or other means in IRC, talk pages, etc. and she'll be able to explain them to you. Forums are ok (ugh, not really) but speaking one on one with another person is always better, or so I've learned. Greyman ( Talk ) 22:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * A readily-available "Donate" option would be preferrable to intrusive ugly ads. This is coming from expirience on another site.  We had ads inserted into the forum content which really pissed people off.  So, I suggested a "Donate" option, and the option was added.  People actually did donate.  They donated 'cause the perks was the removal of ads.  Hell, I'll shell out a subscription if the perk is no ads.  But since suggestions it seems are just falling on deaf ears, then it's looking like we might as well strap in and tolerate the turbulence as it's gonna be wicked.  The captain has just turned on the Fasten Seatbelts sign.  Please put your trays and seats in an upright position.  If they absolutle have to put more ads in...  Then, lemme screenshot a random article and start cutting it apart in Photoshop to see if I can come up with some sorta tolerable layout...   Trak Nar  Ramble on 03:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Here you go, Trak Nar. Cripple_Mr_Onion|This article is in the new layout, as well as the entire wiki it is on. Likewise, the Community Test wiki is set up in the new design as well, so surf those articles if you'd like too. I'm all for keeping Monaco the same, and not changing something that I feel works; but if that's not an option, then I'd rather at least try and offer up suggestions for helping with the change, rather than what's been happening here and elsewhere. Thanks, Trak, for offering to attempt to find some new ideas as well. Like I said, contact sannse via her talk page, or email, or even contact me via the means available to you, and we'll post your ideas here (if you haven't), as well as pass it along the chain. Greyman ( Talk ) 13:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've said it already in a pan-Wikia e-mail. Banner ads at the top. Sidebar ads. Banner and sidebar ads. Exclusive use of the banner replacement type instead of the in-content type. I don't give a damn. Just get it out of the goddamn content. Is Wikia really that strapped for brainpower that they can't come up with any idea themselves other than a chunky ad inside the content? Not after "months" of oh-so-grueling discussions no one in the community was invited to? They don't have a number two option they can deploy and say, "Well, what about this? This was our second choice, and if you the people who actually create our content loathe number one so much, maybe we can go with this. What do you think about it?" Instead, we get "The sales department has a stranglehold over your wiki, every other wiki, and every decision made on Wikia. They want the in-content ad, and nothing short of it will do. So make up some ideas despite the fact that we considered them all already in our focus group but we're going to lie and pretend like this is the only option in the world so we can better shove it down your throat, and we'll dismiss it out of hand and we'll do exactly what the sales department wants, and fuck anyone who says otherwise. Fuck them right in the ear. They're not advertisers. They don't give us money directly, they just make all the stuff that causes people to give us money, so we're too shortsighted to give a shit about them. Better get used to it." Havac 04:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)