The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
There is no consensus for this proposal. That being said, though several users note opposing !votes, their rationales said they weren't opposed to this proposal in theory, but that the current proposal lacks sufficient detail and clarity. A few users noted that Miraheze is a non-profit; technically, it's a not-for-profit corporation, not a non-profit charitable society, foundation, or organization. On another level, several users appeared to mistakenly characterize Grifkuba as a for-profit concern, which is far from certain and, if anything, appears not to be the case. In any case, given that RMV2003 has not responded to the clarifying questions posed, I'm going to close this as no consensus. No prejudice on RMV 2003 starting a new RfC after a reasonable period of time, though I'd recommend personally drafting as a subpage of their own userspace and solicit feedback from the participants below on the companion talk page. Thanks. Dmehus (talk) 19:35, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I have been wondering if Miraheze would like to affiliate with Grifkuba, a host of independent video game wikis. This does not mean join or combine services but rather just link to one another in MediaWiki:Sidebar or an Affiliates page. Grifkuba has had the credibility of hosting independent wikis since 2010. However, Grifkuba is not a wiki farm, but both they and Miraheze appear to share similar goals and values when it comes to providing a dedicated, high quality service to numerous wiki communities, including many wiki customizations, well maintained, fast loading times, etc. And from what I've seen, both consist of lots of gamers! I have noticed that some of the most popular wikis on Miraheze (e.g. Qualitipedia) relate to gaming and entertainment, further reminding me of Grifkuba. By the way, keep in mind that I'm not a staff member there but rather someone who is in charge of a couple of wikis, such as Jiggywikki. I have also been working on a few of my own wikis here such as Nintendo Wiki or helping out a friend with some of his wikis, such as The Viva Piñata Encyclopedia.
Some of Grifkuba's most successful wikis are WiKirby, Fire Emblem Wiki, and most recently, SaGa Wiki, which forked from Fandom last month. Some loosely video game-related wikis such as SpongeBob Wiki (given how it has several video games, possibly more than any other TV show) are also hosted by them. Besides independent wikis, Grifkuba also develops indie games such as Power Master, although they are not a registered indie game developer -- it's just fan games using original IPs.
So before I made this proposal, I asked in the community noticeboard to get an idea of how others would feel about the affiliation/friendship. I was recommended to see feedback from others before making a proposal here. A person noted that Grifkuba uses AdSense, and Miraheze relies on donations only and does not have any ads (which is definitely a good thing, as I hope Grifkuba can do away with ads some day as well once the cost is fully financed). This better helps me clarify that the intent; like I said in the main paragraph, this is not about Grifkuba taking over Miraheze or vice versa, but rather it is about an affiliation. That means that if either side becomes unsatisfied with the other side and does not want to partner any longer (hopefully this does not happen though), they can pull the affiliation without it directly affecting their hosting services.
What I'm about to note is just my personal feelings, but I've also wanted to note how there have been several wiki farms in the past, such as ScribbleWiki and Wikkii, which have since shut down. Even ShoutWiki appears to be less maintained these days. To me, Miraheze is the last bastion of hope for wiki farms that are not Fandom, and with Grifkuba proving to be a reliable wiki host of independent wikis for over a decade, this could help people feel that Grifkuba has a good recommendation for where to host wikis that they won't host, such as if only one person wants a wiki or if it isn't related enough to gaming (e.g. if it's on a book novel series or real world recreational activities). From recent experience, I can give an example, the Portuguese Donkey Kong Wiki, which I formerly hosted for a friend before I ran out of money for hosting, but then moved it here because Grifkuba could not gather any interest besides the wiki founder.
Oppose Miraheze is not commercial like these wikis mentioned, and the "partnership" was only corneted by some translation administrators here at Miraheze. There's also no reason to partner with a privately-organized wiki like this one that hosts wikis normally. It's a normal thing. I hope you understood. --YellowFrogger• (Talk — ✐) 04:16, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose I am not opposed to an affiliate of some sort at some point in the future. My problem here is how exactly does this benefit Miraheze? It seems to me like Grifkuba is much smaller, less wikis, and as mentioned above, lower quality. I don't see a real benefit to Miraheze, Miraheze's goals, or values. To that end, I must oppose this. User:Universal Omega/Sig 04:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC) ］ |
Oppose As others have said, I don't see benefit to Miraheze or a reason to be affiliated with commercial wikis setup like Grifkuba. | -- FrozenPlum (Talk / Email) 06:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose It is unnecessary for Miraheze to be affiliated with Grifkuba as there is no real benefit in doing so (with no disrespect to Grifkuba) and if it were to affiliate with Grifkuba, it would compromise Miraheze's commitment to being non-commercial. centrist16 | | 08:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose So as I read it Miraheze would then be the fallback option for a commercial wiki hosting platform? No, I don't like that idea. Also, like everyone before me, I don't see any benefit for Miraheze. --Soukupmi (talk) 09:58, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose Vague and unclear proposal that leaves me unclear as to what this would actually entail. — Arcversin (talk) 00:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose Miraheze is a nonprofit website. If Miraheze affiliates with a commercial website like Grifkuba, then it would defeat the purpose of a nonprofit website. --Mike9012 (talk) 22:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Abstain I'm actually pretty neutral with this particular RfC, especially since the idea in itself isn't that bad, but then again, the executive decisions are up to both the community and the Stewards. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 10:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
I see no point to this proposal. Unless the specific benefits can be described from both the perspective of Miraheze and Grifkuba, I'm wary to support any sort of connection between the two services. I struggle to find any real similarity between the two, other than membership in the same general stakeholder group of MediaWiki users as providers of MediaWiki services and providers of wiki farms. At this time, I cannot foresee any benefit to any form of connection, other than the mention of Grifkuba as a similar service by independent users by their own decisions to mention Grifkuba. dross (t • c • g) 06:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Abstain I don't really see the point to this either. I have no strong opinions either direction to support or oppose this. However, I believe that the two users above me summarized my thoughts anyways. Hypercane (talk) 07:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Comment: He explained above that maybe this service will not be commercial after merging with Miraheze, I think this is very suspicious to happen, it is difficult. Unfortunately I had to vote against it because Miraheze doesn't share the tables categories together with this wiki, it's worth noting that there are more things to improve in the structure than making the partnership that can't change much. --YellowFrogger• (Talk — ✐) 04:23, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
I did not say it would merge with Miraheze. Read my definition of "affiliation" in the proposal text. RMV2003 (talk) 04:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Comment: I believe the topic of partnership is worth discussing, and I do think an RfC is the only way to achieve anything in the vein of a partnership since there is no entity on Miraheze that can simply say 'we're partners now'. My issue, as expressed on CN, lies in the completely nebulous nature of partnership. You do specify suggestions and both of them raise questions; in the sidebar is a rather deep link and one I'm afraid I couldn't support, and an affiliates page, while benign, would go back to questioning the real purpose. In any case it's clear that the majority here do not find the platform compatible in structure with Miraheze to consider either option. It's worth thinking about, though. Perhaps some of the conversation here, or redirected to CN should put a serious eye on what, if anything, could qualify a platform for affiliation or partnership with Miraheze and what form that would take. --Raidarr (talk) 09:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Comment: At present, there is not a consensus for this proposal. On the other hand, there is not consensus against it either, with some users noting they're not opposed to the idea. There appears to be an emerging consensus that it's a bit vague and unclear, and certainly worth discussing, but I don't see early closure as being warranted here. It should, therefore, be permitted to remain open at least a few more days. Closure can be requested at stewards' noticeboard, if needed. Dmehus (talk) 01:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Questions from dross
Question: What are the benefits to a general, neutral "affiliation" as described here? How would such a cooperation specifically benefit the Miraheze community, and how would it specifically benefit the Grufkuba community?
Question: Is there an equivalent or similar decisionmaking process currently occurring on Grifkuba at this time? If not, do you know what the timeframe is regarding the decisionmaking process from their end?
Question: What changes would be made on Miraheze with the success of such an "affiliation"?
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section