Members, Alumni
3,424
edits
Community talk:Hub: Difference between revisions
→Removal of Social Tools
| Line 219: | Line 219: | ||
::I think that the new skin is rubbish, advertising again. The constant Wikia banner at the top makes it feel no longer like "<code>Grand Theft Wiki (hosted by Wikia)</code>," but more like "<code>Wikia - Grand Theft Wiki</code>" (if you understand what I mean). It looks awful and makes navigation difficult. I quite like Monaco, one of the best MediaWiki skins I've ever seen for both usability ''and'' aesthetics, and they're even taking away customisability with the new skin and terms of use (despite ensuring that it would be ''more'' customisable than Monaco). '''[[User:Biggest gta fan ever|Biggest GTA Fan Ever]]<sup>''[[User talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''</sup>''' 06:41, October 2, 2010 (UTC) | ::I think that the new skin is rubbish, advertising again. The constant Wikia banner at the top makes it feel no longer like "<code>Grand Theft Wiki (hosted by Wikia)</code>," but more like "<code>Wikia - Grand Theft Wiki</code>" (if you understand what I mean). It looks awful and makes navigation difficult. I quite like Monaco, one of the best MediaWiki skins I've ever seen for both usability ''and'' aesthetics, and they're even taking away customisability with the new skin and terms of use (despite ensuring that it would be ''more'' customisable than Monaco). '''[[User:Biggest gta fan ever|Biggest GTA Fan Ever]]<sup>''[[User talk:Biggest gta fan ever|Talk]]''</sup>''' 06:41, October 2, 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::What BGTAFE said pretty much sums it up. Matter of fact, many wikis are planning to move to other wiki hosts (such as ShoutWiki) to avoid the problems this will cause. Almost all of the people who have commented on satff's blog posts have posted negative comments. A poll that was put up showed that 60 people did not want the move to go through, and only 3 people did (most likley staff). They're not even allowing Monaco as an option! Why? Because it costs too much and the technical support teams cannot handle it. This is what I don't get, if you can't fork out money for something everyone wants, how did you get enough money to utilise social profiles or the "My Home" system? I just continue to wonder. If anyone is interested, check out the [http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Anti-Wikia_Alliance Anti-Wikia Alliance] on the Community wiki, it lists users who are not in support, and wikis who are leaving/planning to leave. World of Warcraft wiki, the third largest, is considering a move. '''''[[User:Chimpso|Chimpso]]''''' ([[User Talk:Chimpso|Talk]]) 07:59, October 2, 2010 (UTC) | :::What BGTAFE said pretty much sums it up. Matter of fact, many wikis are planning to move to other wiki hosts (such as ShoutWiki) to avoid the problems this will cause. Almost all of the people who have commented on satff's blog posts have posted negative comments. A poll that was put up showed that 60 people did not want the move to go through, and only 3 people did (most likley staff). They're not even allowing Monaco as an option! Why? Because it costs too much and the technical support teams cannot handle it. This is what I don't get, if you can't fork out money for something everyone wants, how did you get enough money to utilise social profiles or the "My Home" system? I just continue to wonder. If anyone is interested, check out the [http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Anti-Wikia_Alliance Anti-Wikia Alliance] on the Community wiki, it lists users who are not in support, and wikis who are leaving/planning to leave. World of Warcraft wiki, the third largest, is considering a move. | ||
Have a look at this change they made to the terms of use: | |||
'''"In keeping with the goals of the new look, our Terms of Use have been updated as well. Admins will no longer be able to completely remove core features for all users by using custom CSS or JavaScript. This is to protect the universal layout and functionality of every wiki on Wikia and ensure that users have access to all of the features available in the new design. Remember, these new terms only apply to the CSS of the wiki as a whole -- they don’t apply to your personal pages. | |||
To give a few practical examples of what this means: It’s not permitted to remove the right sidebar modules, blogs, and image attribution or add a banner that shifts the entire content area down the page, or alter the fixed width. You can still personalize your wiki with different colors and themes, add large, standout images to the wiki background, create styled templates and tables within the content area. There are plenty of ways to be creative! While these terms will limit what you can do to the overall layout, creativity is still an essential part of Wikia."''' | |||
*''"...Admins will no longer be able to completely remove core features for all users by using custom CSS or JavaScript."'' | |||
:So does that mean that anon editing will be availble on this wiki again? That sort of scares me. | |||
*''"...This is to protect the universal layout and functionality of every wiki on Wikia and ensure that users have access to all of the features available in the new design..."'' | |||
:So you're basically saying that you want all wikis to be alike. You are focusing too much on the new users and not enough on the old, more didicated ones. | |||
*''"It’s not permitted to remove the right sidebar modules, blogs, and image attribution or add a banner that shifts the entire content area down the page, or alter the fixed width."'' | |||
:Bye bye GTW banner, it was nice knowing you. You added much appeal to our site, and it feel so different without you. | |||
*''"There are plenty of ways to be creative!''" | |||
:Well, you're taking a whole bunch of them away right now. | |||
This is starting to look like a dictatorship. Sorry for losing my head a little in this, but I strongly support the return of Monaco and the removal of this from the terms of use. | |||
'''''[[User:Chimpso|Chimpso]]''''' ([[User Talk:Chimpso|Talk]]) 07:59, October 2, 2010 (UTC) | |||