FANDOM


Forums: Index > Village Dump > R.I.P. Monobook - any aftermath plan?
Note: This topic has been unedited for 107 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.


Nonciclopedia admin here. You might have noticed how finally Wikia FANDOM has sentenced our beloved Vector look-alike to death by pretending they care about data protection. We're weighing options: getting used to that horrible skin, relocating to a different host (Miraheze seems nice, no matter the stupid name), or just giving up for good.

No decision was taken yet, I'm just wondering what we're going to do, because even if we really don't give a crap about each other we're still kind of a family.Wedhro (talk) 21:43, May 21, 2018 (UTC)

Inciclopedia admin here for the cry. So far we're just "dealing with it" and crying in a corner. Our priority for the moment is keeping the content and thinking it on cold, but we don't discard measures that were discussed several times (especially during the tension escalations that happened on October 2012 with the massive removal of suggestive content). So I'm here to cry and to listen, but this is so sudden. --Marquii (talk) 22:08, May 21, 2018 (UTC)
Not speaking for anyone here but myself, I would think there would be a way to code an overlay, if you will, a reformat over or within the FANDOM skin. This work is above my pay grade, however. A CSS restoring the left sidebar and the general page format was shown in comments at https://community.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:1456214 , with install notes. I would even settle for the code that would have to be installed by me for a specific wiki as noted in that comment. I'd go for the CSS makeover in a heartbeat and would contribute to a pot to get further customization if no volunteers step up. It's not time to give up yet. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 23:28, May 21, 2018 (UTC)
I have joined in the conversation over at Wikia but as a non-technie I don't know how this plays. Looking like a default Wikia Fan page isn't a good look for Uncyclopedia as a Wikipedia parody. If there is a work around that can be done for all the Uncyclopedias, I am all in for that. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:41, May 21, 2018 (UTC)
I see it as technically challenging and probably won't lead to best results, but if any joint efforts are needed for this and the good of all Uncyclopedias, you can definitely have my help. --Marquii (talk) 23:46, May 21, 2018 (UTC)
Not to discourage but... [1] --Marquii (talk) 00:09, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
I suggest to just try out the Pseudomonobook CSS. Instructions are provided. I'd think at minimum it would be less disruptive with existing page formatting vs Wikia Oasis. Then go on from there to restore the look and feel of Wikipedia by further rewriting that CSS page. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 00:17, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
There's a warning on the same script page that it's for personal use only as it is against Fandom TOS (customization policy). --Marquii (talk) 00:28, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
The warning is that you cannot use it wiki-wide where JavaScript is used. I believe that then means the existing all-wiki Oasis formatting should not be deleted or subverted, but you can add Pseudomonobook to your wiki as custom CSS overlaid on it. From what they write in content otherwise, "personal use" refers to "your wiki".
Terms of Service read: "If you want to go further, then there is a CSS page for each community. This can be used to add formatting to tables and infoboxes, or to control the colors more specifically. It can also be used to add decoration, including borders and font changes to almost any part of the page. It should not be used to change the layout of the frame around the content, to remove, move or reformat the ads or FANDOM bar, or to change the wiki's features and functionality." This is what Pseudomonobook is intended to be. And just what does "layout of the frame around the content" mean? Round edges? I could live with that. Color? not a problem. Sizing? It's still a basic rectangle, not a triangle or something. Yes, we'll now have the FANDOM bar around. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 00:55, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
It seems quite clear they will revert any radical change to their skin, it's in the rules: you can change little things here and there, but anything actually different (such as "Removal, changed placement or changed functionality of ads, spotlights, standard FANDOM features") is forbidden, and a Vector look-alike would do plenty of such things, for example removing that big ass, almost unusable menu bar on top.
They already said Monobook wikis's traffic is not big enough to justify exceptions. A few weeks ago they deleted a CSS page on Nonciclopedia because it was considered confusing for readers (it disabled most of the interface) and they couldn't care less if confusing the reader was part of the joke. Dozen of pages lost their meaning overnight.
I can only speak for Nonciclopedia but the reason why it was created on Wikia was because, back in 2005, it was free and they used Wikipedia's software and skin, so a parody would be easy to do. That's no longer the case. Wedhro (talk) 05:08, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
Useful info there, for sure. How long was the CSS page running? And it was a local CSS added/overlaid and not the wiki-land CSS? If the CSS page was radical enough AND interfered with underlying FANDOM CSS (how else would they know?), I could understand a takedown. If Vector-like/Monobook was the framework, I'd think you were asking for problems rather than just accommodating certain pages that could be individually coded. In the end, you did something FANDOM didn't understand and therefore didn't like, period. Otherwise, it sounds like they're going against their own TOS which doesn't necessarily mean that they can't do what they want. I think all we can do is try and see if something passes muster, but again, that's not my call. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 05:33, May 22, 2018 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, it wasn't a CSS page but a javascript which we'been using pretty much forever: it created a series of popups that were used in many pages to "trap" the reader, which is really not an issue since major browsers allow to escape things like that. BertH removed the code for violating the TOS and he didn't care much if lot of things suddenly stopped working, including our whole Test namespace and most boxes in our homepage. If it wasn't for KockaAdmiralac, who guided me in a complex series of changes to multiple JS pages we would still be stuck with a fairly broken website.
Anyway, I just realized Uncyclopedia was already forked years ago because of Wikia shenanigans. Care to summarize how it went? Wedhro (talk) 05:54, May 22, 2018 (UTC)

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but adding or altering JS in the wiki-world is a really bad thing to do. It is most definitely a violation of TOS. From what I can gather in this end of the wiki universe, it's not surprising that you were left alone for so long nor is it a surprise that the code was just yanked out. Things like that could just make things hard for all of us downstream.
I was not here for the split. From my ramblings in the archives, I get it was about overarching control by Wikia from the top, probably affecting the users who liked to freeform their articles the most but also the users who hated absolute censorship of 4chan-type content. The fork got a copy of everything that existed and now produces newer content independently. You can post the same article on both sites but I haven't seen anyone do that; the old membership basically split in half and went their own ways. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 06:41, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
Adding JS is allowed under the super-strict TOS with pretty much the same limitations for CSS, and while a few things were just for the laughs, most are needed to make the wiki look as much as Vector as possible, so it wasn't really a choice. BTW we copied most of it from Uncyclopedia ;)
So, what's the plan? If I was you I would move to the forked Uncyclopedia and let the house burn itself, too bad we really can't. Wedhro (talk) 06:48, May 22, 2018
(Rejoining the conversation). The Wikia Uncyclopedia would remain if there was no one active here. That is why it is page ranked about the Fork. So for those of us who stayed here like myself, I always kept that in mind. There were other issues like the tolerance of a lot of stupid humour/ short pants type of stuff and a lot of admin self indulgence in my view. So, an issue of personalities can come into it as well. I think also the other alternatives we are talking about (going to other sites to host the content) will come across the same problem as this - at least the reasons why Wikia-Fandom are changing the skins. I think therefore the fight has only just begun. We at the Wikia hosted Uncyclopedia got the people here to remove the content warning sign and besides the odd censorship (how they hate nipples here!), have been able to run the website more or less as we liked. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 07:03, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
A note from the peanut gallery -- I've had some experience on the Fork as well as on the Wikia uncyc site. IMHO the Fork, which left to avoid excessive control, ultimately lost all control and acquired some rather toxic features which may not be obvious at first glance. A lot went on over on the IRC channel which ... oh whatever, this is not the place for such whining. In short, they had no Spike there, and they were seriously chaotic, and that was not ideal. BUT going forward, the point Romartus already made, which you must keep in mind in considering your options is that this site has been Hotel California'd. You can clone any time you like but you can never leave Wikia. Uncyc tried it and the Fork is nowhere in search results. Communpedia tried it and these days they're back on Wikia. (Illogicopedia managed it but I have no idea how -- maybe they got the goods on the Wikia admins?) You can't take down Uncyc from Wikia (because they own the content), and you can't rename it (because they own the name), so all you can do is clone it, and then you're in direct head to head competition with the Wikia publicity machine, which will continue to push the old site over your clone in the search results.  :-( Snarglefoop (talk) 18:58, May 29, 2018 (UTC)
Actually, the fork is on the front page of search results (DuckDuckGo) right after this site. I still can't recommend it, though. Llwy-ar-lawr (talk) 08:32, May 30, 2018 (UTC)
You're right as regards DuckDuckGo, even though the Spoon is top ranked, the side info is a link to the Fork. --Wasp1 (Orate) 08:58, June 1, 2018 (UTC)
Regards name rights, as I have said before no one can own the name 'Uncyclopedia' as it was used in book title about sports of all things (you can see it on Amazon). Of course, if anyone at the Fork had the money, they could in theory purchase the domain names of Uncyclopedia.com (the original parent name of the site) and that would then change the game. But they they become the 'owner' and with all this biz about holding email addresses and details, would then I presume have to comply with the German Democratic People's Republic (GDPR) requirements. --Wasp1 (Orate) 09:17, June 1, 2018 (UTC)

Is this answer?

Fandoom

I'm ready. --Marquii (talk) 21:51, May 22, 2018 (UTC)

https://dev.wikia.com/wiki/PseudoMonobook --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 17:58, May 22, 2018 (UTC)

"This script is for PERSONAL use only!
You are free to install this script for yourself, but it is not allowed to be used wiki-wide (e.g., in MediaWiki:Common.js or MediaWiki:Wikia.js), as it would violate FANDOM's Terms of Use.
(See the customization policy)" --Marquii (talk) 19:36, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
So a user could install this script but not to view other sites in Fandom - of 'Fandoom' as someone quite cleverly changed it to. I also think this must be something to do with the new funders of 'Fan-Doom', a hedge fund called TPG Capital. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:04, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
Yes. "User" means "site owner"/"site runner" and the CSS is site specific. It can be further modified but obviously limited to what FANDOM actually wants. I'd already be thinking about taking Pseudomonobook to the next level, maybe restoring the colors as a start. That would require a body who knows html and CSS.
Depending on how the current pages are written, I worry that things like the elements on the front page would be screwed up if Uncyclopedia goes with the change to Oasis. I suppose we will just find out? And for alternatives at this point, are there any besides Pseudomonobook? --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 21:42, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
Here's the frontpage with the new skin. You can add ?useskin=oasis on any page to test it out. --Marquii (talk) 21:53, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
Good evening, I am Don Gaspacho, bureaucrat from the Désencyclopédie (in french). I am also interested by this Pseudomonobook, but I am not really a "technie", so I would want to know how to applie it. I have also seen in the topic of the Community Central some suggestion, as to use "Vector". Don Gaspacho 21:52, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
Good evening Don! I created a file - User:Romartus/common.css by copying and pasting the information from the PseudoMonoBook link. It seems to work but I have lost the mediawiki links at the top of the page. Otherwise it clears away all the links to Fanboy sites. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:09, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
How ! Thanks you very much LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ®  ! I think I will try to use it once they will have destroyed our old monobook. Don Gaspacho 23:31, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
I still think a world wide complaint from all the Uncyclopedias and their sister projects should continue to complain about this. I advise that the link how to do this change in the meantime is passed around for all users and to encourage new ones to create this particular file. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:35, May 22, 2018 (UTC)
Please do protest. So I am completely wrong. Backchannel word from on high is that Pseudomonobook will not be tolerated as a site skin despite what apparently TOS currently says; so essentially TOS changes too, or the policy is now "clarified". They also send their deepest condolences upon the death of the reasoning behind the existence of Uncyclopedias. However, it has been noted that Uncyclopedia JS has needed little support for years and would not require it for compliance with GDPR as it didn't share control with Trusted Marketing Partners. Thank you Marquii; Oasis plays nice with old formatting it seems, so an immediate concern for me is gone. It's just not really Wikipedia-like.
Now I wonder about .co, the fork. Unless someone rewrote all the underlying code (which FANDOM could not), they're likely not in compliance either(?). --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 00:14, May 23, 2018 (UTC)
I don't know, depends on their host I guess. I guess if a site refuses to comply or modify their code, there will be a cost to pay somewhere. I will create a page here to help users use the PseudoMonobook look to cut out the other crap 'foisterings' from FANDOOM. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 08:36, May 23, 2018 (UTC)

The bomb has dropped and I hope you have at least tried PseudoMonoBook for yourself. Quiet page vs Oasis, seems to be truly ad-free except for the usual. We'll see how long that lasts. You may see the admin dashboard and see "customize" but it apparently does not work with Pseudo except for major preset color schemes. You may also see the forbidden site CSS control -- don't use it, obviously, but set up your own CSS page as Romartus noted, if you so desire.

Immediately missed on Uncyclopedia is any control to return to the home page other than using the back button. Or am I missing something? Second is navigation to frequently used pages which I tried to save on my browser. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 08:46, May 25, 2018 (UTC)

Since you guys have the Gadget extension enabled, couldn't you import the Pseudo Monobook script through it? They shouldn't have any problem with this. And after it is approved, make a message to the public persuading them to enable it.--Luma.dash (talk) 21:35, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
Which website are you active on? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:10, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
If you are asking me, I'm active at Sonic wiki and it is also hosted on Wikia.--Luma.dash (talk) 13:19, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

Digging deeper

Inciclopedia Ads

This is what awaits our lovely Inciclopedia, and probably Uncyclopedia as well

I've been messing with Oasis skin in an effort to get it ready enough to be presentable to the users. The advertising policy is so massive and unbearable that encouraging our users to install AdBlock might be an option... just check the thumbnail. --Marquii (talk) 00:27, May 23, 2018 (UTC)

Oh MY... That is way I didn't used Oasis so much before this. Anyway, maybe we should try the FullWidthOasis at this point.--Cavv 06:05, May 23, 2018 (UTC)
A work around that can be all applied for all Uncyclopedias/Sister related projects whilst we continue to agitate for a vector-like option. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 08:30, May 23, 2018 (UTC)
I send you a link to a discussion I have with Hypsoline, who is a member of the staff who speak french. This topic is in french (sorry), but I think it gives a good information about the staff state of mind (spoiler : close to contempt) for our proposal. Don Gaspacho 09:05, May 24, 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Don Gaspacho. I read the thread using Google Translate to help (doing it in chunks of no greater than 3,900 characters). So the impression is that the realisation that MonoBook wouldn't comply with the new legal requirements was only taken last week! Hence the rushed announcement and removal of the MonoBook option. I see it is also related to the MediaWiki issue and Wikia's own 'fork' from that back in 2016. There is also a suggestion that the whole point of the Wikipedia parody idea no longer fits in the Wikia-Fandom business plan. Not that this site or other related sites have actually earnt any advertising money or such like, and how could they if they were told not to attack advertisers with funny articles. However, I always saw our sites as 'loss leaders', websites that could attract writers to contribute who would then head off and look at Wikia's other fan sites. I indeed have checked the Games of Thrones site on here for genuine information. Right now I think our parody sites should hang on in there and adapt to the new situation as best we can and use the PseudoMonoBook option until we can get something closer to Vector in future. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:18, May 24, 2018 (UTC)
  • Enough use stylish to web browser... it will not break the site regulations because it will "personal use" ;)

Getting away ?

I really didn't want to consider that solution until today, but now, I have concretely seen the effect of the Oasis Skin, and also of the Pseudo-Monobook style, and even that one can not replace the old Monobook. Maybe might we leave Wikia and the Fandom to find a new place where the uncyclopediae could keep their graphic style, their identity, their meaning ? Don Gaspacho 15:58, May 25, 2018 (UTC)

I understand. It's worth looking around if you have people with the tech skills to do it. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:59, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
See my earlier comment, several feet up in the thread. You cannot leave Wikia. You can start a new site but that is the best you can do, and then you'll be in direct competition with yourself, because the old site will still be 'live' and you'll never get the entire community to boycott it. Putting a wiki onto Wikia is a one-way decision -- too bad nobody realized that ten years ago. Snarglefoop (talk) 19:04, May 29, 2018 (UTC)

Restoring MonoBook

Nonsensopedia (Polish Uncyclopedia) here. I have discovered a way to restore MonoBook after May 25th. It's pretty simple:

  1. Right-click on Uncyclopedia and select Inspect or something similiar.
  2. Find the JS console.
  3. Type document.cookie = "useskin=monobook; expires=01 Jan 2100 00:00:00 GMT; path=/" into the console.
  4. Refresh cache. It depends what browser you are using.
  5. Done!

209po 19:16, May 25, 2018 (CEST)

You can also add this line into your common.js. But don't forget the ; sign at the end of the line when adding it common.js. 209po 19:42, May 25, 2018 (CEST)
It would really surprise me if they wouldn't remove Monobook altogether from their servers, making that trick useless. They already removed our Monobook.css page which included a ton of usefuful tricks cobbled together in 11 years of activity.--{{subst:utente:Wedhro/firma1}} 18:19, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
As Wedhro says, it's just a matter of time it's completely removed, they hidden it as a workaround and they'll probably remove the skin in future patch cycles. --Marquii (talk) 18:52, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, is now invalid, every pages with ?useskin=monobook tag are redirected with ?useskin=oasis tag so technically no.--Cavv 19:07, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
Well...we can but keeping looking for a way out from this swamp. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:03, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
Hi all, Dutch Oncyclopedia-admin here. We're not at Wikia, we are still at Carl's, and we have got a proper working server these days, after having had a record of having several issues throughout the years. Maybe that is one thing to think about, as this indeed is just not what a parody of Wikipedia is about. Also, perhaps I am ignorant about this, but what about the folks from en.uncyclopedia.co? R7 (NL) 12:35, May 26, 2018
Hi Roye. Welcome. Wikia (or Fandom as it is officially called) stopped supporting the other skins on the grounds that that it was too technically complicated etc to carry one as before and also to comply with the EU data law which came into action on the 25th May (I am sure you have received emails from other organisations on this). There has been a long running discussion over at Community Central at Fandom-Wikia. The current position is that we are encouraging users here to instal a script known as 'PseudoMonoBook' to cut out most of the crap links to other wikis. See here for an example: User:Romartus/common.css. We can't run that on the website overall. Regards Uncyclopedia.co, there was a schism back in January 2013. They are now have a non-wikia hosted website so are currently running a Vector skin. Who knows what will happen next but like many people here, we are trying to get Fandom-Wikia to at least give us a Vector skin option in future. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:59, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
I genuinely hope you will succeed on that, as this skin is ridiculous indeed. R7 (NL) 13:12, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
I actually recall the day when a skin called "Monaco" was enforced as well. That was rejected too eventually. R7 (NL) 13:20, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

Hosting alternatives

At Nonciclopedia (italy) we're considering many options, and one is of course moving away from Wikia. Does someone know if "the other Uncyclopedia" could host more uncyclopedias (as the starting en. seems to impy)? If not, which wiki farm would you suggest? I like Miraheze because it's fully updated, open-source, no-profit, and features Vector skin, but it's also new and probably not ready for many large wikis moving there. I feel we need to find a common solution to this problem.--{{subst:utente:Wedhro/firma1}} 13:01, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

I don't know and I wouldn't make such a dramatic move. The problem will remain, the wikia hosted website will continue without you. When we had this issue back in 2013, the active user base split. Those who supported the split tried to put links on Uncyclopedia.Wikia in an attempt to make this website point at theirs. These links were removed. One way would be to offer Wikia-fandom money for your website name(s) but depends who actually owns the domain name? Uncyclopedia.com is owned by Wikia Fandom after they bought it off the site's creator Jonathan Huang. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:07, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
We Dutchies are not running at Wikia. If you would like to message me at my talkpage on Oncyclopedia, perhaps I could offer some infos. R7 (NL) 13:09, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
Yes, thanks I did understand that about you not being on wikia. I will create an account at your website if that's ok and talk to you that way. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:12, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
Try using Wikidot! It is a free wiki hosting platform and it still offers the Monobook template. Although, it has not been updated for a while and its biggest community, SCP Foundation, is planning to migrate from ("break up with") it, and you would have to get used to the new source codes. Also, you can just use MediaWiki and set up your own server, accepting donations like Wikipedia does! The preceding unsigned comment was added by BradTheRad (talk • contribs)
How does Wikidot have Monobook? It's not MediaWiki. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 02:21 8 June 2018
It uses CSS to create something that loks like Monobook.You'll see it if you sign up and then go to the "Create site" page.BradTheRad (talk) 01:10, June 11, 2018 (UTC)

Inciclopedia update

Given that (apparently) we've been one of the most receptive communities to the transition, I'd like to give information about how we're dealing with the drama:

  • We've done the transition with an intent on giving the best user experience without forcing our users to install stuff on their accounts or browsers.
  • Those users that complained about ads have been offered alternatives such as using an ad blocker or the FullWidthOasis skin.
  • We've run a nonbinding poll on Twitter to see what do our users support. 26% supports leaving, 28% supports unconditionally staying and 46% supports staying but complaining to FANDOM and try to gain as much rights as possible.
  • A FANDOM helper reached us on Discord to help us with the transition and has been helping fixing the design issues that made the website unusable.
  • We had to disable the "Título" template which allowed to use wikitext on the article title. It was not only broken, but making all articles unable to display pictures. The FANDOM helper said he'll reach staff to see if we can have an alternative, otherwise we'll start removing it from our articles.
  • Several articles are broken, so we enabled a form to report design issues, and offer tracking of the issues through our Discord.
  • We've asked for a bot flag to do manteinance work.
  • We've enabled WikiaNotifications as a cheap alternative to the sitenotice.
  • The perspective of most users is "the new design sucks, the ads are unbearable, but it would be worse to close". Some users did ask for leaving, but understand the difficulties behind.
  • For all this, no plans in short term for leaving are made, but we're getting prepared in case we have to.

My personal opinion on the new design:

  • It Sucks.
  • A Lot.
  • But worse is nothing and we can't have a frikipedia ending of the story so we're not leaving.

That's all we have to tell for now. --Marquii (talk) 13:29, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your detailed survey of the changes you have made to your site. I will see if we can emulate at least some of them here. I agree, we shouldn't give up the fight to be offered an alternative to what has been dropped on all the wikipedia parody sites - and indeed, other more fan based sites with this change. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:09, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
What was the issue about Frikipedia? Was that the website that got sued off the internet?? I think if I am correct, legal issues are something ALL websites like ours need to consider, especially with this law change. That is one factor in favour of at least having FANDOM to deal with if necessary. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:15, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
Yup, Frikipedia was forced to close twice because of legal trouble of one of its admins. That is our largest concern, our priority is the content and the community over everything, and leaving would make us more vulnerable to this kind of threats. --Marquii (talk) 15:40, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, I had a check as well on that. I think the legal issue (all other stuff aside for the moment) is important for all websites that have required email confirmations to continue holding personal data. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:48, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

Crazy idea: opening a second website outside Wikia and mantaining both

I mean, kinda like the two Uncyclopedias. I'd open a wiki with the same articles and use it to import the new (good) articles from the Wikia one, as some sort of mirror website people are welcome to join but not forced to (it wouldn't be hard for me, the weekly amount of new good articles is not too high). People who hate the skin are free to move on, otherwise they can stay and enjoy a super-crappy version of our wiki; let time sort things out. I'd keep control of both wikis, so there would be no hard schisma.

I say that because most people are afraid of leaving the old wiki alone (we wouldn't) but hate the new skin with a passion. We could still use our social media to redirect people. Also, blocking edits to anons would incentivize people to move.

As a side note: why people here don't just move to the other Uncyclopedia? --{{subst:utente:Wedhro/firma1}} 15:20, May 26, 2018 (UTC)

I will stick it here for now and see what we can do. Also, privately holding other people's data now is not so simple. Consent even to be on email list is now required. Someone at an independent site would have to take care of any possible legal issues. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 15:40, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
I don't really know what constitutes "data". I mean, nobody uses their real name and such, and AFAIK when replicating content outside of Wikia it must be attributed to the authors, and keeping the cronology is mandatory. But honestly keeping up with CC licensens, Wikia's lengthy policies and who knows how many international laws is a friggin' headache for someone just wanting to kill some time writing jokes for free.--{{subst:utente:Wedhro/firma1}} 17:21, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
Agree with the last but two sites also means two sets of admins or twice the work for unpaid volunteers.
If you sign in to Uncyclopedia AND use PseudoMonoBook, you will find essentially zero ads (a feature of that CSS). You don't even get the Wikia link images at the bottom of the page which can be avoided by just not scrolling down that far. So the appearance is not horrible as on other branches. So I don't really see a flood of refugees from Uncyclopedia just for that. And someone who is a reader rather than a fan of flashy image content might tolerate Oasis but probably would load PseudoMonoBook if they were paying attention.
As for moving to .co, the fork, any new user there would notice the difference between us and them. .co, or at least its current active writers, are going away from the Uncyclopedia look and feel of articles although the physical appearance matches Wikipedia. They have been very much less concerned with revising/improving article they inherited after the split, especially the features on the front page. Their UnNews is very active but is mostly one-joke posts or mildly-written obituaries. I wonder if visitors in general hit up both Uncyclopedias for new content and will continue to do so as neither has been particularly prolific in recent times. --Nigel Scribbler sig2 (talk) 23:01, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
People feel like it's no longer their website. It no longer looks like Wikipedia (which we are supposed to parodize), the list of things that no longer work in Oasis is getting bigger and bigger (our whole Test namespace is broken!), we no longer feel like we're in control of our work. It's not a trivial issue.
"Two sites also means two sets of admins or twice the work for unpaid volunteers" - Nope, same admins. The other website would just be a mirror, so it's just a matter of importing/exporting worthy articles when they're written, which are not too much. I can do that while I sip my morning coffee.
Point is: we need a backup plan. Wikia doesn't give a fuck about us and keeps changing rules. First we could no longer show nudity, then we couldn't use new Mediawiki features because they forked, then we could no longer use popups for joking because it hurts the readerd's experience, now we get a broken website with 4 days notice and no friggin' opt-out. What's next? Not everyone is willing to wait and see.--{{subst:utente:Wedhro/firma1}} 23:13, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
I think the point is that Wikia is a changed beast from the early days, in fact it really is FANDOOM now. I did ask them back in 2013 directly why they wanted the wikipedia parodies when the rest of their 'product' was to encourage fan sites which would then attract advertising. So making a backup of your site here does make sense if in future FANDOOM decide sites like this no longer can be part of their family. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 08:52, May 28, 2018 (UTC)
An important conclusion from all this: you can look like Wikipedia but your content not be like Uncyclopedia (see the fork, even Frikipedia on its last days), and you can look no where near to Wikipedia but keep the same content, rules and style as before and be funny. Don't forget this is an aesthetic change. We still keep How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid (CSDYNE in Spanish version) as a master rule. It doesn't matter that much how it looks, if the content is funny and there is work behind. It sucks, I blame Fandom so hard for this, the time given to adapt was too small, and the ads are unbearable, but we keep the content and the community and that should be priority over everything. I (personally) prefer to keep the content and community rather than making a fork and risking splitting admins, users, content and even having legal risks. --Marquii (talk) 14:01, May 28, 2018 (UTC)
Good points. Splits/schisms occur where some on the site like redesigning the site so that becomes the joke whereas others are more interested in the content than platform. Fandom's changes have made the former harder to do and I understand why people like to use the open source MediaWiki platforms. I suggest try and keep your community together. Uncyclopedia didn't and in the end both sites are both shadows of what had been a greater whole.--LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 16:58, May 28, 2018 (UTC)

Ex Desgalipedia Wikia

Sorry, Desgalipedia here. 9 years ago I had asked for possibilities to create interlinks with other Uncyclopedias and no answers I got. I believe I had done between September and November 2009, 2 or 3 attempts and was ignored. Well, I do not know if Wikia was abandoned and there were not enough administrators to respond to the demand for their sites and that's why I moved the content to Uncyclomedia. I do not think it's the same problem as you, but for a long time I noticed absurd changes in Wikia's policies.

A few years ago, I noticed other content wikis that have provoked a kind of censorship in many articles and I think it is positive because of the number of users and readers who are not above legal age but turning humor wikis into mere fandoms seems to me the worst of them. Rhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie preppiedits 04:56, May 29, 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rhubella. Welcome. I am sorry you were ignored before, I wasn't an admin then. Regards the links page, I believe that was for Wikia hosted sites only. I notice your website is independent. I would have to find out more as regards this issue. There has been censorship here, mainly of the female nipple (pornographic/shock images have always been banned) if spotted, though that did extend to at least one article 'HowTo:Commit Suicide' which was eventually removed. I agree that a humour wiki should not just be a fandom site. It should be bold enough to be satirical about anything and anybody but that is not the same as simply writing abuse. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 06:15, May 29, 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, I believe that the issue is different from what happened with Desgalipedia in 2009, as we are dealing with wikis with more than 5000 articles as opposed to a small wiki of 34 in the epoch.
That is, what are the plans for the future. I think the best way is to abandon Wikia due to the fact that they do not give another alternative in the skim used. If other wikis want this, I can propose to Carlb that I apply the same terms that are dealt with Nonciclopedia, or for particularities of each wiki.
... you also have the option of getting a standalone host. I would not see anything against it but agreeing with this absurd blog skim has nothing to do with our wikis. So the question that each community should ask and continue as a parody of wikipedia or become mere humor wikis of second importance? Rhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie preppiedits 14:46, May 29, 2018 (UTC)
Our site forked (and half our user base left Wikia) in 2013. If we were going to leave wikia, it would probably make more sense for our community to rejoin at en...co, which is already independently hosted and not on Wikia. But we haven't made that decision at this point in time. However, this site still has strong search engine stats, and when the fork happened, Wikia made it clear that it would not be permitted to pull new people from the Wikia site to the fork forever. It wasn't just Spike keeping people from advertising the fork. If Spike hadn't made his stance, Wikia staff would have, just like they did on Wackypedia (former site of Illogicopedia, now home of the vandals). And eventually, this site would be in the same condition Wackypedia is in now, with search engines pointing to it, abandoned or not. I don't want this site to become Wolvypedia, abandoned or not. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 16:41, May 29, 2018 (UTC)
I get it. From a certain point when Desgalipedia left Wikia, I was given the orientation to delete the whole site and it was still blocked and I lost my bureaucratic function. Although there is no vandalism on a small site. Rhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie preppiedits 21:26, May 29, 2018 (UTC)

Fake Vector

I've just finished putting together some CSS that replicates the appearance of old-style Vector as closely as possible. I think somebody wanted something like this. (If you'd rather it look like Monobook or new-style Vector I'll have to make some significant changes.) Here is what it looks like in Firefox on Linux:

Fake vector

Flaws/limitations:

  • It violates the TOS, obviously, so you can't use it site-wide.
  • There are a lot of things I wasn't able to make exactly the same with just CSS. It could probably be done with Javascript, but I don't know Javascript. (There are also probably a lot of things I could have changed but didn't get to.)
  • It's designed to work with PseudoMonobook, which I also have installed. Some of it may be redundant, though.
  • Some glitches such as:
    • The alignment of the left set of tabs -- they line up perfectly with the content box on my Linux machine, but on Windows they're a pixel to the left.
    • The sidebar overlaps the content area when the window is narrower than a certain width.
  • I have only tested it in Firefox on Linux, Firefox on Windows and Internet Explorer. In IE the user links have a white background that overlaps the search bar and the 2nd set of tabs (actually the footer) is at the bottom. I don't know how to change this. Also, the green and blue boxes on the front page jiggle when I scroll, but they do the same thing when I'm logged out so it's not something I introduced.
  • I am not a CSS expert. Oasis is a jungle of exotic code including things like flexbox which I'd never even heard of before. I'm sure someone with more advanced skills would have done a better job.
  • I run an ad blocker, and whenever I'm on this site it thinks it's blocking at least one item. There may be something important I'm not seeing.

The code is currently on my common.css page. I'll move it to a separate page shortly in case anyone wants to use it.

Not sure if this will help anything, but it was worth a try. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 03:53 1 June 2018

Now at User:Llwy-ar-lawr/fakevector.css. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 04:02 1 June 2018

Thank you Llwy-ar-lawr. I will try this out on my Bot account. :) --Wasp1 (Orate) 08:07, June 1, 2018 (UTC)
WOOOOW!!! It's back!!! Even better than the PseudoMonoBook skin. I have tried in on Firefox on both a Mac and PC. THANK YOU!!! --Wasp1 (Orate) 08:28, June 1, 2018 (UTC)
I wonder if you turn off ad blocker you will see that initial page that many sites now have (outside Wikia) that give you the option to accept or not accept cookies. The GDPR in other words. --Wasp1 (Orate) 08:33, June 1, 2018 (UTC)
Come to think of it, as the default skin is Oasis for any new user, this only changes if you install the code for PseudoVector and PseudoMonoBook on the common.css file attached to your name. So I don't think GDPR would apply once you have done that manually. Anyone else have thoughts on this? --Wasp1 (Orate) 08:44, June 1, 2018 (UTC)
Of course it doesn't break any rules if you use it for yourself. I thought that was clear. ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 06:52 2 June 2018

Also my unsolicited 2 cents on the situation. I don't expect Wikia will ever reverse this decision or provide better skin options. They're an amoral for-profit company. They don't care about their users -- as long as they're making money off their ads, it doesn't matter who they upset or drive away. You can't close a Wikia wiki, so even if you leave it will still be there to generate ad revenue and traffic. The new customization policy also obviously has nothing to do with security and everything to do with forcing all their wikis to promote Wikia and display adverts. The GDPR regulation is both an incentive and an excuse. There is no counter-incentive.

In particular, they definitely don't care about the Uncyclopedia wikis. They're not "FANDOM". They're not part of the image Wikia is trying to project, so even if everybody on them got fed up and left they probably wouldn't care. It's not like the wikis wouldn't still be there. That's what matters. (Why do they call themselves FANDOM anyway? Silly name, and in all caps to boot. Like they're shouting.)

So the options are pretty much:

  • Stay here, put up with Oasis and maybe use personal CSS to tone it down.
  • Go somewhere else.

Re leaving Wikia: It's technically possible to create a fork that's more successful than the original. It's been done -- see http://awa.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Moved_wikis (yes it's an external link, horrors). A number of those rank higher in search engine results than the wikia originals and are quite active, though the latter also seem to still have user bases. WikiFur is unusual in that the original site doesn't even exist anymore. IMO, however, the Uncyclopedia fork doesn't deserve to be on that page because it's an example of how not to do it. From what I gather, less than half the community left. Some of the discussions leading up to it were held "behind closed doors" as someone put it, on private IRC channels I believe, and overall the handling of it apparently alienated most people. Now it still ranks lower than "Uncyclowikia" in search results and appears to generally have a lower level of activity. I regard it as a cautionary tale: if you really want to leave Wikia, get everyone on board first. Trying to spin what they did as a "move" is transparently inaccurate.

Sure, it would be nice if everyone here moved over there. I don't see that happening. I for one have no intention of going back until they raise the standards of content and behaviour and desysop certain people who should never have had those rights, in other words take themselves a lot more seriously, and I don't expect them to ever do that. Not that it matters. OTOH the culture there seems to be off-putting for a lot of people.

Basically it's hopeless, I guess. Let's go climb trees.Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 06:52 2 June 2018

Doctors-agree-its-hopeless

'Nuff said ... Snarglefoop (talk) 07:43, June 2, 2018 (UTC)

Nailed it! ;-) Snarglefoop (talk) 07:45, June 2, 2018 (UTC)
The fork has been mentioned quite a few times over the past week or so on the forum posts here. Hopefully you can forgive me bringing up the subject in light of the, uh, extenuating circumstances. I wasn't around for the forking drama, but I'm more than willing to discuss matters about the fork site, as it pertains to this community's discussions of it here, if people don't wish to discuss it on the site itself or on other channels. All the best. Wageslav (talk) 21:24, June 2, 2018 (UTC)


Hi Wageslav. Considering the size of this forum already...that would need a bigger boat. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:38, June 2, 2018 (UTC)
I have also left a message on your talk page. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:24, June 3, 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure if people are still watching this forum, but I should let you know that I'm still in the process of fixing Fake Vector. I didn't try to give you a 100% perfect version because I didn't want to fiddle with it forever. You can see a list of things to fix here, which you're welcome to add to. If you'd like to always have the latest version, I suggest you import it (put @import url('/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&mode=articles&articles=User:Llwy-ar-lawr/fakevector.css&only=styles'); at the top of your page) instead of copying the code. I promise I won't put anything there before testing it in at least one browser/OS.

Also, I think it should be possible to modify the site CSS to at least have the same colours, fonts, etc. as Vector (I'm not sure the common.css and common.js pages are working right now, but that's another issue). Would you like me to try to do this? ❦ Llwy-ar-lawr talkcontribs • 01:09 8 June 2018

I am going to create a new forum to see if we have any resident java experts (or at least, advanced 'dabblers'). --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:19, June 8, 2018 (UTC)

Intro