Requests for Comment/Close the Fire Emblem: The Tabletop RPG wiki and merge into The Fire Emblem Wiki


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
 * This RfC is out-of-scope and something that should be raised with the local communities or on Stewards' noticeboard if necessary as the Content Policy sets out. In any case, there is no consensus. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 12:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Tali64³ accepted the request on Fire Emblem: The Tabletop RPG, a few days after The Fire Emblem Wiki. Fire Emblem: The Tabletop RPG is considered a subtopic of a larger subject (The Fire Emblem Wiki). I think the former should be closed and merged into latter. Silicona (talk) 10:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposal 1: Close the Fire Emblem: The Tabletop RPG wiki and merge into The Fire Emblem Wiki
I think Fire Emblem: The Tabletop RPG should be closed and merged into the larger The Fire Enblem Wiki because the former is most likely to be a duplicate and therefore violate the Content Policy. Silicona (talk) 10:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Support

 * 1)  as proposer. Silicona (talk) 10:34, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1) First, I'd like to note that any RfC that affects local wikis is out of scope of the RfC process. Still, I'm voting abstain on this RfC because the Fire Emblem Tabletop RPG may be significantly different from the main games, enough that it would warrant a separate wiki from the existing Fire Emblem wiki; however, this may not be the case, and information about the tabletop RPG may very well fit into the existing wiki. I'll also note that this request came the day after I declined a request for a Super Mario Maker wiki created by the proposer on the grounds that its information could go into the existing Mario wiki. In that case, information about Super Mario Maker would actually fit very well into the existing Mario wiki, since Super Mario Maker is a spinoff series of Super Mario. Tali64³ (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1)  Wrong venue, wrong process, and out of scope for RfC.  As stated by others, please work with the bureaucrats of the respective wikis to broker a merge if there is no meaningful difference in topic/content or engage Stewards via the Stewards' Noticeboard if it's considered sufficiently problematic for direct action. --NotAracham (talk • contribs • global) 00:35, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 2)  Per others, this is very much out of scope, among other issues. Collei (talk) 04:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 3)  Out of scope and unsuitable for RfC. Spencers (Hello) 18:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Comments

 * 1) I'd just like to say that this is rather something that should've been requested on SN rather than be made into an RfC. Clause 11 of the Content Policy designates Stewards as the users who are in charge of resolving these differences and assisting communities with such matters. Reception123 (talk) ( C ) 11:16, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) I would argue that a specialized wiki about an offshoot is a sufficiently divergent scope than a wiki that has a primary scope of a mainline franchise. If the two want to merge in this case, I think it should be their discretion alone. Similarly I do not believe a Nintendo wiki (which has existed, just using for example) can lay claim to every specialized franchise/game wiki, because the degree of coverage is different though the possibility of merging is always there. Finally per above, this would be something to bring to Stewards (though I doubt their assessment would differ much from this and I'd contact the wiki operator instead first). Either way, I believe this is out of scope for an RfC. --Raidarr (talk) 12:27, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) As Raidarr, Reception123, and NotAracham have all stated, this is way out of scope for an RfC. Should be closed and moved to SN if necessary to continue there. BrandonWM (talk • contributions • global • rights) 04:22, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.