Fallout Wiki
Register
Advertisement
Fallout Wiki
Forums: Index > Wiki proposal votes > Temporary Name Change : Fallout Wiki

This poll is to gauge community support for a temporary name change of this wiki to "Fallout Wiki" for this to be fed back to the site admins and bureaucrats.

This change is intended to be temporary with a further poll to follow for a more permanent name and logo in the following weeks.

Why this change is required:

  • IANAL but I understand it is legally questionable as to whether this site has the legal rights to the name "The Vault".
  • Continuing to use this name creates discord amongst some of our more prolific members who might be willing to work on both wikis.
  • It can prevent an Edit War over titles and logos; this edit war could result in otherwise good editors getting banned.
  • "The Vault" is an identity within the fallout community that is closely aligned to people like Ausir and Porter who have thrown their full support into the new site.
  • Continuing the old branding whilst a new site has the same name can create confusion between the two wikis.
  • Changing branding allows this site to go in a different direction to The Vault; allowing both wikis a greater chance of success.
  • "The Vault" does not appear to be used as the name of this wiki within Wikia in any case - the only advertisements and references to this wiki on other Wikia sites that I have seen refer to it as "Fallout Wiki" or "Fallout 3 Wiki" anyway.

Possible reasons against this change:

  • The community has not yet had a reasonable chance to discuss a name or branding. To counter this the suggestion is that this change is only temporary
  • A permanent change would require another vote. However it will continue to cause problems whilst this new name and brand is discussed.


Comments[]

Hi all,

Please hold on this discussion for now. The problem is that some of those likely to vote are also likely to be moving to the new wiki. That means they have a clear conflict of interest, although of course their intentions are honorable. Changing the name of this wiki could have significant effects, and so isn't something that should be decided with anything other than the good of this wiki in mind. It looks like we'll be talking to Ausir off-wiki about any possible legal implications, so please leave the status quo in place for now. Thanks. -- sannse WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 21:18, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

I disagree completely. There is no problem with people being members of both wikis. I think this "with us or against us" attitude that seems to come with this post is disappointing. As for major effects I am this very second looking at an ad on the edit page for this wiki (clearly the most pointless place for said ad - encouraging me to visit a Wiki that the ad is posted on) which refers to us as "Fallout Wiki" (as it always has) - As such any change to "Fallout Wiki" is not a major change but merely reflecting current Wikia Practice. Lastly I hope Wikia choose to match their future actions with their "community consultation" retoric as in all honesty this could be your last chance to keep some regular users of one your better performing wikis. Agent c 21:37, November 22, 2011 (UTC)
Likewise. I don't see the point in talking just to Ausir about the legal implications to this, it's a whole-wiki movement. Pushing the community to the sidelines seems counter-intuitive, and there's nothing that's stopping the people that don't want a name change from saying so as well. Nitty Tok. 22:23, November 22, 2011 (UTC)

What I'm hearing from you is that Wikia communities don't have the right to collaborate about issues that directly affect them. Isn't that what communities are supposed to do; cooperate to resolve issues that they face as a whole? It sounds extremely rude and arrogant to say that you, a single individual, are larger than an entire community. I, in fact, am moving to the new domain, but that doesn't mean that I am totally forsaking this wiki. I still respect it and want to make sure both parties are content, but it would appear that the community using it should make these decisions, not an member of the host company, no matter how high their position. --Kastera (talk) 00:39, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

I fully support a name change. Also a logo change, the current Fallout lettering reminds me too much of Fallout 3, since this is a site about all of the games it should be something to reflect all of the games. The crisp black letters from 3 wouldn't be it. Most of the logos from the games have more rustic lettering used instead of clear black letters. User:Great_MaraMessage 01:12, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm pretty sure no one can call me conflicted of interest. I'm new, clearly not in any clique, and have made comments in support of the future of this wiki. Frankly, I have no idea whether I will edit either site, or neither in the future. But I can still easily understand that the best interests of the community that stays here is to forge their own identity. Put me down as an unbiased yes.--The Gunny 02:00, November 23, 2011 (UTC)

Agent c: I don't have problems with people being members of both wikis at all. However I have seen problems in the past with decisions being made on one wiki but for another, and am worried about the same pattern happening here. As we've said elsewhere, changing the name may harm this wiki. If it's part of how people find the site, then there may be less people doing so, and less future community to maintain and edit it. So any discussion of what should change should be by people who are trying to make this wiki a strong and healthy one, without the conflict of preferring those people join another site.
Nitpicker of the Wastes: I don't want to push the community aside here, but I do want to give time for the community of this wiki to recover and discover who they are before any major decisions are made.
Kastera: the concern isn't the community of this wiki making decisions, it's the community of the new wiki making decisions for this wiki which only benefit the other. It's a problem we've seen before (and one that isn't about good intent - I'm not saying this is a deliberate thing, just that it's the practical effect). The committed community of this wiki should be able to make decisions of course, but I'm asking for a pause to allow that community to settle... and for it to be clearer who is going to be part of it, and who is going to focus on the alternative wiki.
The Gunny: yes, you are right that this community will need to (re)forge it's own identity. And it should do that without the complication of conflict of interest. I acknowledge that you are speaking from a position of neutrality, but think it's also fair to say that's not the same in all cases (including mine, obviously. My aim is to be fair to both sides, but my focus is in helping this wiki recover and thrive rather than on moving people to the new one)
Reading over what I've said above, it seems I'm being a bit repetitive here, I hope you'll forgive that in the interests of clarity :) -- sannse WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 20:13, November 23, 2011 (UTC)
The fundamental problem I see going on right now is an assumption that people will be "choosing" one side or the other. There is, of course, a third, and most likely option: some folks will contribute to both. The sticky part is when any entity tries to determine someone elses intent. I sure am the last guy who has any idea what the rules that govern sites like this are, but as I understand them, anyone willing to contribute in a constructive/positive way is allowed the freedom to do as they see fit. There is nothing, as I understand it, keeping people from contributing to both wikis. The question then becomes whether those contributions are beneficial to one wiki at the expense of the other. That's where the problem is. How, in the absense of obvious malicious deeds, does one determine another person's intent? That's hard enough to do face to face, with people that you know, let alone on an anonymous internet. That's the real question that's bothering me right now. Who will decide the future course of this wiki? Wikia staff and the principals of the other site obviously have vested interests in the well being of their respective enterprises. My understanding of the rules is that anyone has the right to have their say. The community as a whole then has the burden to determine which course they feel is in their best interests. Unless my understanding of the situation is wrong, then I feel pretty strongly that the community here, be that as it may, should have the right, and the obligation, to determine the future course. If some of that community includes people who contribute to any other site on the internet, unless there's proof of malicious intent, I don't see how their opinions are any less valid than mine own. Folks here aren't stupid. If the community sees something they feel is not in their best interests, they'll certainly choose appropriately, but unless I understand this stuff wrong, that community includes anyone who wishes to contribute.--The Gunny 22:13, November 23, 2011 (UTC)
Sanse at the end of the day this thread isn't a decision its merely a consultation (something I note that you critise Ausir for not doing prior fork; here is the community choosing to consult itself)- that would be made at the end of the poll by the remaining administration team once they've heard the community's voice and have taken that into consideration and they and the vault itself will judged on their choice of actions. If there is a technical reason why this change should not occur I would suggest the that this is something for the admin team to consider when evaluating the result of this poll - not a community concern. Agent c 00:32, November 24, 2011 (UTC)
The Gunny: you have a lot of good points to make, thank you. You might consider me kinda "burned" by various forks in the past where it appeared that admins were looking after both wikis, but it ultimately became clear they were preventing a revival of the wiki they had left (deliberately or otherwise). I absolutely want to assume good faith, that's been a byword for me as a wiki user for a long time now, but have experience that tells to be cautious.
Agent c: that's also a good point. I'll withdraw my request to hold on the discussion. -- sannse WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 00:48, November 24, 2011 (UTC)
Advertisement