Forums: Index > Wiki proposals and applications > Creation Club on main vote

Firstly, I'd like to apologize to Agent c for raising yet another CC vote, but I feel it has to be done.

As I stated on CC revisited I am struggling to find an objective reason not to include some elements of Creation Club content on main article pages (especially as the content is so well integrated for console users to the point of once its in, its in).

CC will be clearly marked as such on articles, allowing those who do not have the content to just skip over. We can make the icon's linkable, so users can see which piece of content they relate to.

There were other items that came up as well, however they need further discussion before implementation, so they can be raised at a later date. Based on those who commented before, these have a good level of consensus already, so all that is required is some ratification. Before moving to a vote, I'm going to open up for a week of commentary to ensure I'm not throwing something out there that is completely unfit for purpose. If there is feedback to take away, I will do so before moving to the vote. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 16:30, March 5, 2018 (UTC)


Poll finished on 4:30 pm March 7, 2018 (UTC).
  • A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
  • You can vote by placing the following line in the appropriate section of the option you support:
    • # {{yes}} ~~~
  • Please do not edit other people's votes.
Poll template is being used for a timer only

I agree with the suggestions as Sakaratte puts them, the CC content, certainly relating to quests, should be linked to on character and location pages. I was thinking of summarizing the paint job pages, overview would serve better purpose I think. World objects too in some way if possible, they have too many items seperately. Jspoel Speech Jspoel 18:47, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Get it done. Agent c (talk) 23:46, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Aye. We need to close this debate - I can agree to everything above regarding the CC usage, as long as we can get it all unified as policy. AGC, you've got this summed up: Get it done. |\| () |\/| /\ |) | Talk | Discord | NMC 14:17, March 6, 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense to me, seems like the most reasonable solution. They were made with assistance from Bethesda, so should at least be mentioned. They are dubiously canon however, so the CC tag makes sense before CC info. Skysteam (talk) 15:34, March 6, 2018 (UTC)

On the first few talks of adding Creation Club content to the wiki, I was hesitant as they weren't confirmed nor denied canonicity. However, I think we are sort of moving towards CC content moving towards acting like a DLC in general. I like the new tags, as like the DLC's, you can just skip over them if you don't own them. Whether it is canon or not, I think this is the way we need to go with this content. Zackmaster1 (talk) 21:19, March 6, 2018 (UTC)

LGTM - FDekker talk 16:19, March 7, 2018 (UTC)

If consider all the previous elements only of the Fallout world, can it become a semi-canon work? That is, take only the elements of the world Fallout and all that is made of them. If you exclude elements from Doom and Prey, then the rest can be recalculated for the canon. Wasteland Workshop and Contraptions Workshop have a variety in decors, furniture. And the remaining weapons and armor (Chinese Stealth, Hellfire, Horse, Backpack, Paint Jobs PA and weapon, bundles) can be counted as traces of previous games, it does not seem to violate the general atmosphere of the game. Variety from the developers will not hurt. And what do the add-on developers say? Maybe they did not have enough time and money to finalize the Horse Power Armor and other things? Maybe they tried to somehow... bring these small defects to the end and "designed" it as a dubious addition. And with Wally Mack, it's better to have such a fate, in part, she explains the situation with MacCready, who was in his Tunnel Snakes. .--ExplorerSmaily (talk) 17:59, March 11, 2018 (UTC)

This is something a few of us have thought about. Certainly there is a lot that does and can fit in with canon, however the concerns people have raised are if CC will clash with each other in the future. I think it would be something to look at again later down the line. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 20:27, March 11, 2018 (UTC)
But who is it that decides what is and isn't canon? Why would the Doom BFG not be canon while the pipe shotgun is? Paladin117>>iff bored; 20:33, March 11, 2018 (UTC)
We can doubt and hope for the future. I think that this is sometimes unpredictable and Todd Howard can say that all additions from games should be treated equally (or what else can say). I even believe that if the developers do not give clear explanations about CC, then this will be the first non-canonical addition that will become insignificant for the Fallout world. Strange situation: where Fallout 4 and its add-ons are produced by Bethesda, therefore are canon, the CC is not a canon. I hope that the situation with this will be resolved somehow quickly and the addition will become something worthwhile, if possible. --ExplorerSmaily (talk) 11:20, March 12, 2018 (UTC)


Seeing as people want to get on with it, I'm going to move to vote.

Poll finished on 6:00 pm March 14, 2018 (UTC).
  • A consensus must be reached by voting before any action is taken.
  • You can vote by placing one of the following lines in the appropriate section:
    • Use # {{yes}} ~~~ if you support the proposal.
    • Use # {{no}} ~~~ if you are against the proposal.
    • Use # {{neutral}} ~~~ if you wish to abstain.
  • Please do not edit other people's votes.

Should we include the above Creation Club content on mainspace articles?


  1. yesIcon check 👌 - FDekker talk
  2. yesIcon check Paladin117>>iff bored; 18:25, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  3. yesIcon check we do it with all other content we cover, I don't see why we should make an exception, because CC. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 18:31, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  4. yesIcon check I see nothing wrong with it if we specify its CC content. It will make it less confusing for new editors too. 123123abcabc (talk) 18:45, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  5. yesIcon check Jspoel Speech Jspoel 18:46, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  6. yesIcon check You're in my sights...SilentWraith_291 {♤Niner Ace of Spades♤} (talk) 19:50, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  7. yesIcon check Nate64 - 9:44, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  8. yesIcon check RubiksCube03 (talk)
  9. yesIcon check --YOD ᕦ(ò_óˇ)ᕤ 02:26, March 8, 2018 (UTC)
  10. yesIcon check NCR Ranger Alex (talk) it should be included, but a note saying it's CC at the top of the articles should be added
  11. yesIcon check - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog) 11:53, March 8, 2018 (UTC)
  12. yesIcon check One.pretorius (talk) 12:37, March 8, 2018 (UTC)
  13. yesIcon check Skysteam (talk) 14:19, March 8, 2018 (UTC)
  14. yesIcon check One step at a time, for the greater good 寧靜 Fox 17:04, March 8, 2018 (UTC)
  15. yesIcon check Agent c (talk) 22:09, March 11, 2018 (UTC)


  1. noIcon cross Yodamort (talk) 18:04, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  2. noIcon cross Xa3 (talk) 18:08, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  3. noIcon cross Great Mara (talk) 02:33, March 8, 2018 (UTC)
  4. noIcon cross May be semi-canon. --ExplorerSmaily (talk) 17:59, March 11, 2018 (UTC)
  5. noIcon cross DisgustingWastelander (talk) 21:02, March 11, 2018 (UTC)


  1. neutralIcon neutral As a PT crat, i try to stay away from those things, considering we already have a mindset regarding CC stuff, so i stand neutral. Dragão Carmesim Red hammer and sickle 20:00, March 7, 2018 (UTC)
  2. neutralIcon neutral Have no strong feelings either way on this one. I'll go with whatever the community decides. Aya42 (talk) 14:59, March 10, 2018 (UTC)


  1. yesIcon check Pedro Washington (talk) 21:50, March 17, 2018 (UTC) - Vote has been closed.



The people have spoken. The above proposal shall moved to policy. I'll get the policy page sorted this weekend. Sakaratte - Talk to the catmin 23:42, March 20, 2018 (UTC)