FANDOM


  • Bane Cane
    Bane Cane closed this thread because:
    This forum has not been contributed to in over six months and the discussion points have been taken into consideration for a proposal to the community.
    19:50, July 8, 2014

    A user asked me about affiliating another wiki with ours. I asked another Admin for input, as I realized we don't have a formal policy on this, and I wondered what others think about it. I would like to see us develop a policy, so would like to get ideas from you.

    What "rules" or "guidelines" do you think we would want in order to affiliate to another wiki, or add a link to our main page for another website? As of now, I think it's "ask an admin and hope they say yes"!

      Loading editor
    • I think one if the requirements should be that the wiki be about a mobile game, like our wiki. While not a requirement I'd like them to be about another BFS game. I think the the perfect affiliated wiki would be the Gizmonauts Wiki

        Loading editor
    • That's interesting, Psycho. I was actually thinking we should affiliate only with other DV related sites. I never thought about affiliating to other game wikis.

      What does it actually mean, to you or others, to "be affiliated"?

        Loading editor
    • oh, you were talking about other websites, not necassarily wiki's? ah, I recommend the DragonVale subreddit, they already have a link here anyway. Also, maybe we should finally offically "partner" with the Breeding Sandbox. I think affiliated means having links to each others sites, and being in active communication with those in charge of each site, also working on projects together.

        Loading editor
    • Hello!

      Are we planning to add a section of "Affiliates" on the main page, like the Disney Wiki and Gizmonauts Wiki?

      In my personal opinion, (if we add that section), only links to wiki's about Backflip Studios game app (with same type) should be added. Since, DragonVale is a role-playing game, the affiliates should be wiki's with role-playing game and created by the same company. Currently, I can only see Gizmonauts wiki being an affiliate to DrgaonVale wiki.

      The others such as Breeding Sandbox, etc should remain in "Resources" section.

        Loading editor
    • I was talking about wikis, primarily, but think we should likely have a formal policy developed for both.

      We are already closely affiliated with the Breeding Sandbox. We have links to it, he has links to us, and we interact all the time.

      Adriano-not planning anything at this point, just gathering input from users.

        Loading editor
    • Hello!

      Yup! I agree. So, does that mean all the links in "Resources" section indicate that we are affiliated to them? So, we are actually gathering input on what kind of links should go there and also another part for other wikis, right?

      hehe...Okie dokie!

        Loading editor
    • Pretty much, Adriano. I think this is another policy that should be vetted, voted and institutionalized. Unfortunately, most user time is focused on changing pages, so I was hoping to get some more specific thoughts on this to be able to draft something.

        Loading editor
    • Hello!

      Owhhh!Okay :) Yeah! I'm sure everything would be done soon.

        Loading editor
    • Affiliation is a topic that can go many ways, so I am going to see what people feel on the subject before giving my input.

        Loading editor
    • *revives thread using the potion Witch Rudna gave me lol

      Howdy!

      I also think that Backflip Wiki and German DragonVale Wiki are our affiliates.

      hmmm...So, currently I can only see DragonVale wiki being affiliated to three other wiki's which are Gizmonauts Wiki, German DragonVale Wiki and Backflip Wiki. (my opinion, though)

        Loading editor
    • I could think of multiple others, depending on who/what/why we would want to affiliate with them.

        Loading editor
    • Well, I can see about the same wiki in different languages, and the company wiki, but why should we add the Gizmonauts wiki? I was thinking more about a DragonVale Fanon Wiki ...

        Loading editor
    • The Gizmonauts wiki has somethiing to do with ackFlip, but not DragonVale...

        Loading editor
    • BackFlip

        Loading editor
    • For those who are saying "this wiki makes sense, this one does not"-we are not setting out at this point to start doing affiliations. I'm trying to get a feel for what we would put into a decision.

      Here some things you have said or others have mentioned:

      1-A DV Wiki in another language

      2-Similar game wikis (with "similar" vaguely defined)

      3-Other games by BackFlip

      4-Other sites connected to DV

      5-Fan writing connected to DV

      6-Various sites, but should have similar "PG-13" language

      7-Sites that also disallow discussion and pictures of pre-release or "hacked" content.

      What other thoughts are out there?

        Loading editor
    • Im not 100% sure if this would fall under # 4 or 5 but i do know of some dv commuties on a diffrent site, that have to do one of them being about the wiki (made my yours truly) for art releating to the game, this being http://dragonvale-wiki.deviantart.com/ & http://dragonvale.deviantart.com/ so that could possibabky be a affilate.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, a DeviantART profile will be nice...

        Loading editor
    • Although there are many DV fanons, sites, etc. I feel that an affiliated site/wiki here should be informational to the topic and can decently benefit from each other.

      I think that it is also a good idea to have game-related sites including Gizmonauts and other Park-Stimulating games like Dragon Story or Dragon City (although I personally detest having them affiliated to this wiki).

      My biggest point though is, what do both sides wish to accomplish or benefit in this sort of "tag-team" collaboration?

        Loading editor
    • More people would join each commity would be the the bemefit

        Loading editor
    • Wolfiethezwolf wrote:
      More people would join each commity would be the the bemefit

      Would it? Or would it just be a gain for just one side of the party?

      I think that an affiliated site should be deemed as well developed instead of just connecting anything to the wiki.

        Loading editor
    • I agree on the "well developed, with a following" concept. There should be benefit to both parties, rather than one site becoming the "advertising media" for another.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah a French DragonVale Wiki!!!

        Loading editor
    • We could add a wiki page with affiliated wikis, unless we are putting it under the staff section on the main page to try to even out the slightly longer side column.


      To me affiliated wikis would be mobile games created by Backflip Studios, but may also include wikis about DragonVale in other languages.

      The line becomes fuzzy when we start talking about all of the fan wikis.

        Loading editor
    • Bane Cane wrote:
      We could add a wiki page with affiliated wikis, unless we are putting it under the staff section on the main page to try to even out the slightly longer side column.
      To me affiliated wikis would be mobile games created by Backflip Studios, but may also include wikis about DragonVale in other languages.

      The line becomes fuzzy when we start talking about all of the fan wikis.

      Here's my list of what I think is considered "affiliated wikis":

      • BackFlip studios wiki
      • DragonVale Fanon wiki 
      • DragonVale Wiki in different languanges 
        Loading editor
    • True, the Backflip games one could be a but fuzzy too since the only game they have which is similar to DragonVale is Gizmonauts.

        Loading editor
    • Bane Cane wrote:
      True, the Backflip games one could be a but fuzzy too since the only game they have which is similar to DragonVale is Gizmonauts.

      I agree.

        Loading editor
    • Again, I think that an affiliated site should be deemed as "well developed" instead of just connecting any site to the wiki and should provide both equal beneficial factors to each party.

      An excellent example for an affiliated site in my opinion is the German DragonVale Wiki

      It follows the concept of the DragonVale game and is an extremely well-developed and informational site. If I recall correctly, they have helped out our wiki before with some image rendering and other DV pictures here to help us give the highest quality for both sites.

        Loading editor
    • At this point, we are not adding anything! (Just want to clarify). I'm hoping to get input from users on how they might define this, so we can develop a policy.

      Bane, I think having a section on the main page might ultimately be a good idea. I just want to be sure we have protocols in place that include some basic guidelines (ie general content, activity level, appropriateness, etc) since we have none at this point.

        Loading editor
    • I agree that we need protocols, and that the wikis being linked should be well developed.

        Loading editor
    • Well, if you admins plan on adding a fanon wiki, which one would it be?

        Loading editor
    • We could consider having a horizontal list of the more well known fan wikis under the affiliated wiki "banners" perhaps. The design in my mind depends on how many affiliated banners there will be.

        Loading editor
    • Affiliation to me means a partnership in a way. Where both sides benefit equally and work together to make each a better place (helping when needed, offering suggestions for how might one improve, etc).

      At this point in time, I don't think Fanon sites should be affiliated sites. If someone wants to create a blog as a reference to some of those sites (and there are a lot of them) that's one thing, but I think if we start to "affiliate" with one and not another it may cause issues.

      This something new, it's not a pre-existing policy, so I think we should be a little more "strict" about what sites we affiliate with. The Sandbox is a given, in my opinion. Robo has done a wonderful job with it and, honestly, I already feel that it's affiliated with this wiki because we do help each other out.

      I think as far as guidelines go we need to look at well developed sites, sites that are similar, have a similar target audience, hold the same standards we do (in terms of user behavior/conduct), etc. Good examples to start with would be the German DragonVale Wiki and maybe the Gizmonauts Wiki (same style of play, same company). I don't think all the DragonVale sites in different languages should automatically become affiliated. Maybe a blog could be done up with a list of links to the sites in various languages and in time some might become affiliates. I say the German DragonVale Wiki is a good start because they have helped us in the past. I think developing a partnership with them will more than likely benefit both parties.

      Although personally, I'd like to see us start small with this. Adding just one or two affiliated sites in the beginning. To be affiliated means, to me, that each party is in an active partnership where communication is open and open minded. Also thinking about this... I think one thing we need to cautious about with affiliating with sites is that if one site gets "negative press" it may trickle over to us or vice versa. Which is why I think, at the start, we need to be more "strict" with who we affiliate with. Setting up guidelines is good. I also think that any admin who is approached with a question regarding affiliating a site with ours needs to research the site. I think maybe it should be a trial run? If the site seems good but the communication and "partnership" seems to only be one sided then I don't think it's in either's best interest to be affiliated.

      I'm not saying communication would have to be constant, but it would be nice during updates if possible. Especially when new features are added to the game.

        Loading editor
    • I agree with Celtic. The German DragonVale Wiki has helped us in the past, and so has communication with the Gizmonaut Wiki (even though the content in that game seems to have halted at the moment).

      The problem with fan wikis is that it is subjective material rather than objective material. The issue I have with the Backflip Wiki is that it seems incomplete; as is the French DragonVale Wiki.

        Loading editor
    • Hmm...I do like the idea of "affiliation"....

      ...but at the same time like only a few afiliates. Too much seems sort of....meh.

      If we are doing affiliates, I think we should use sites that are similar to us, by BFS, and have a deent number of users on both sides

        Loading editor
    • I honestly don't think the number of users should matter. Well, with in reason.

      I think we should start with, as I've said before, one or two sites (maybe three depending on discussion). I think the Sandbox should be automatic (at the agreement of Robo). Making it "officially" affiliated, since I feel that it already is.

      I think in the beginning of affiliating sites, we should stick to those sites that are DragonVale related. I agree with Bane that Fanon sites are more subjective and may or may not be what we want in an affiliated site.

      I agree with Lea that too many affiliated sites would be too much. I think too many would become overwhelming if we all agree that affiliation should be a two-way partnership with open and active communication, where both parties are benefiting and helping each other when needed.

      Guideline suggestions (some of these may repeat): well developed site, same standard of user conduct/behavior (i.e. being respectful, not sharing pre-released/un-released content), open and active communication between the sites (especially during game updates (for those sites that are DV related))... there are probably more, those are just what I've thought of off the top of my head.

      Affiliation does not equal advertising, in my opinion. Advertising (linking another site but not really having much in the way of an active partnership) is fine in some cases, like what we have on the Main page already with "helpful links" (or whatever it says). Advertising is part of being affiliated but affiliation is a lot more involved.

        Loading editor
    • We already have the sandbox linked on the Main Page. It is also not a wiki so it is kind of hard to say it is an affiliated wiki.

      Right now I only really think the German DragonVale and possibly Gizmonauts should be affiliated Wikis.

        Loading editor
    • Affiliated doesn't have to be limited to wikis. There are a lot of sites out there that are DragonVale related that are not wikis but that shouldn't mean that we can't be affiliated with them if they fit our guidlines and a developer from that sites wants to open that pathway. Which is why I've been using "site" not "wiki" when talking about this. I personally don't think we should limit ourselves to only affiliating with wikis. And I know that the Sandbox is linked already (both on the main page and in the chat room header), doesn't mean we can't choose to make it an "official" affiliated site if we want and agree to.

        Loading editor
    • I'm just saying if we are only doing affiliated wikis on Wikia then it would be an issue. If we are doing "Affiliated Wikis and Web Sites" or something then I agree with the sandbox. We can even ask him if he'd like a "wordmark" created to serve as the image portal

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, I would agree with that if we decide to only affiliate with Wikis... however, and I was probably editing when you posted, I personally don't think we should limit ourselves to that. For example, what if the external forum wished to open that pathway? Would we then say, sorry we're only affiliating ourself with wikis? Seems a little closed off to me. A shorter title could simply be "Affiliated Sites" it would encompass both non-wiki sites and wiki sites. This is just my opinion, but will be fine with whatever is agreed upon.

      Regardless of whether we go with "Wiki only affiliation" or we open it up to include non-wiki sites, the guidelines should apply to both.

        Loading editor
    • True, the issue with the external forum is that Wikia prefers our discussion to be on the actual wiki so affiliating directly with forums off wiki is a touchy topic. It is okay to say it is there but saying we have a stronger bond could be a problem.

        Loading editor
    • It was just as an example. I understand and agree that Wiki-related discussions should stay on the wiki, however I don't think affiliating with an external forum to discuss the same game should be an issue. Again, it was merely an example, not suggesting that we should or should not affiliate with the external forum. If people feel more comfortable not affiliating with any external forum for fear that wiki-related discussion will take place, I understand that. However, I don't think it should affect if we want to affiliate with anyother external site (i.e. sites like the Sandbox).

        Loading editor
    • I changed the title of the post; I didn't really intend us to discuss only wikis.

      I think we are already defacto affiliated with the External Forum and the Sandbox, so at some point, if we develop a formal process, we may want to move them into a "formalized affiliation".

      I'll try to do some research on some other sites to see if they have anything formal on an "affiliation" policy.

      As for Fanon wikis, I know that at one point Wikia suggested we might want to develop formal policies that separate fanon/canon wikis, with shared leadership. If we go there at some point, then the designated fanon site would naturally be an affiliation, but outside of that I would likely be hesitant about affiliations with "non encyclopedic" sites.

      I don't think I've ever heard of Wikia having a concern with the forum, outside of it being used as the place where staff can discuss things out of site of the community. Many users utilize that site, and it's where we get the majority of our breeding combos, so I would certainly hate to limit affiliation based on something Wikia once said!

        Loading editor
    • Well, I searched "DragonVale Fan" and I get...

        Loading editor
    • The Gold Dragon wrote:
      Bane Cane wrote:
      We could add a wiki page with affiliated wikis, unless we are putting it under the staff section on the main page to try to even out the slightly longer side column.
      To me affiliated wikis would be mobile games created by Backflip Studios, but may also include wikis about DragonVale in other languages.

      The line becomes fuzzy when we start talking about all of the fan wikis.

      Here's my list of what I think is considered "affiliated wikis":
      • BackFlip studios wiki
      • DragonVale Fanon wiki 
      • DragonVale Wiki in different languanges 

      I still think that affiliated wikis should be fully developed and have a following, not just be "about" DV. For example, the "French Wiki" linked several comments up has one user and has not been edited since 2012. So, it would be of no benefit to us to affiliate with it!

      Gold, none of your links opened pages for me. I am familiar with the fanon wiki you adopted, and as of now it has two active editors. Again, I think a fanon site would need to be more robust and have active, current users before its affiliation would add value to us.

      I'll try to draft up something for the community to consider based on the inputs here and information I can find elsewhere; no idea when and if anyone else feels like taking it on, please do!

        Loading editor
    • I kind of agree, right now I think the only site that is up to par and ready to be affiliated is the Breeding Sandbox, and possibly the German DV Wiki, and Gizmonauts.There could be arguments about hose too though such as new content being scarce in Gizmonauts now which has left the wiki kind with low activity.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, and I lean more toward affiliating with Dragon games than with anything BFS related!

      I think the external forum would be a great candidate; that is very active community discussion. There are also some non-wiki DV sites that might make sense. But, for now, I think we leave things where they are until we come up with a community-agreed process and policy.

        Loading editor
    • It might be good to come out of this discussion with maybe the four or five choices, and then hold a community discussion where people can discuss whether or not they think one..or however many...should or should not be affiliated and why.

        Loading editor
    • Bane Cane wrote:
      It might be good to come out of this discussion with maybe the four or five choices, and then hold a community discussion where people can discuss whether or not they think one..or however many...should or should not be affiliated and why.

      Yes!!

        Loading editor
    • I think a policy/guideline should be established first, before we decided on any affiliated site.

        Loading editor
    • CelticStar87 wrote: I think a policy/guideline should be established first, before we decided on any affiliated site.

      That would be included when we go to community discussion.

        Loading editor
    • I would like to keep this as short and simple as I can, but I feel that an affiliated site needs to have these five traits:

      Reliable, responsible, refined, recognized, and resourceful.

      I understand that they may be a little vague at this point, but hope that this may spark some ideas to form a policy.

        Loading editor
    • Hmm ... I might work on something this weekend about a 'guideline' for affiliation, but I can't today because I have other work, and Friday I will be away almost the whole day.

        Loading editor
    • I think we write and agree on a policy, with no suggestions on specific sites. That would be done after the policy is established, as Celt mentioned.

      The goal of THIS thread was to get inputs to what a policy should incorporate, and I think we should keep the discussion/vote related only to policy. If we write it clearly, then making a decision on whether a site (wiki or other) fits into the policy should be easy and not require separate discussions.

        Loading editor
    • I saw the French wiki up there and just wanted to say I speak French also so I can help out there if it's needed.

        Loading editor
    • MrAwesome8 wrote: I saw the French wiki up there and just wanted to say I speak French also so I can help out there if it's needed.

      The wiki seemed scarce and looks like most information is missing from it, but if that is something you want to take on you can try to, but it looks like a lot of work just to make it potentially eligible for affiliation.

        Loading editor
    • Dragon trip wrote: I think we write and agree on a policy, with no suggestions on specific sites. That would be done after the policy is established, as Celt mentioned.

      The goal of THIS thread was to get inputs to what a policy should incorporate, and I think we should keep the discussion/vote related only to policy. If we write it clearly, then making a decision on whether a site (wiki or other) fits into the policy should be easy and not require separate discussions.

      Okay, then we have to write up some criteria, like what kind of service we are looking for the site to provide, what kind of topics should the site be about, how long should the site be in existence (if we want to do that), how up-to-date is the site, are people contributing to the site active, and etc.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, that is what we have to do. As I've said many times in the past few days, we have a lot of policy work to do around the site! This particular item doesn't run high on my priority list right now, but someone else may want to tackle it using these inputs.

        Loading editor
    • Pickle mentioned he might want to take this one on. I've been doing other things around the wiki, but this one could probably be drafted up fairly quickly for elaboration in discussion if Pickle find he doesn't have time for it. I'd try to take it on in that case.

        Loading editor
    • Yep. They are all pretty quick once we get some inputs! It's the discussion and voting process that takes the most time!

        Loading editor
    • Quick question:

      Would a site need to be discussed and voted on by the community before it can become affiliated with the wiki, or is it up to the consent of the staff?

        Loading editor
    • The way I wold prefer is that first we draft up some guidelines which could be discussed and supported/opposed by the community until we get some which are supported.

      Then possibly we come forth with a few for the community to discuss whether or not they meet the guidelines, and then vote on it.

        Loading editor
    • Hmm...what if the wiki has a user trying to get the site more active? 

        Loading editor
    • I understand that you are trying to get the fandom site more active, but it will have to be determined in the discussion if we want to include fandom sites, and what criteria would be needed on them if they are to be included. It may be too abstract to have criteria put to since it is more of a subjective content than objective content. It is up to the community though what is decided. More likely, there will have to be different sets of specific criteria for different types of sites in addition to general criteria.

        Loading editor
    • Bane Cane wrote:
      The way I wold prefer is that first we draft up some guidelines which could be discussed and supported/opposed by the community until we get some which are supported.

      Then possibly we come forth with a few for the community to discuss whether or not they meet the guidelines, and then vote on it.

      Thanks for the response, Bane.

        Loading editor
    • I also suggest in the policy that we include other dragon-breeding games. The dragon story wiki is quite established, has a lot of active users, and is pretty similar to this game. While technically, the two wikis really can't share or support content, each can likely gain the other more users.

        Loading editor
    • The question isn't who do we want to affiliate with, it's why exactly would we want to affiliate with anybody?

        Loading editor
    • That wiki in particular has a lot of users, so does this one, so we could each gain a lot, especially since they are similar games, and most of the users may be interested. I just wanted to say established websites about games with dragon breeding would be a good idea. DS Wiki came to mind, and I thought I'd mention that example. :)

        Loading editor
    • Thank you for making the suggestion, it is definitely something the community can consider once the guidelines are discussed and approved.

        Loading editor
    • Patchpen wrote: The question isn't who do we want to affiliate with, it's why exactly would we want to affiliate with anybody?

      This was the same exact thing that I thought when this discussion was opened. What is the purpose of affiliating with other sites? Development? Advertising? Input from different communities? Collaboration?

      Then again, it doesn't hurt at all to have some sort of policy set up for these guidelines.

        Loading editor
    • I'm not really sure, but I don't really see it as necessary to do. I guess it would just be to show sites with other common interests. The sandbox would be one with dragon breeding, the German on possibly since it is about the same content. Dragon Story while still a dragon breeding game and Gizmonauts while a breeding game they aren't really about the same content so it is kind of hard to determine for me.

      After the guidelines are discussed and some decision is made maybe it will be easier to determine what meets the qualifications, but I still don't really think it is really needed.

      I would also think affiliation would have to be a two-way street. The other sites may not want to be affiliated with us for whatever reason.

        Loading editor
    • The primary reason to have a policy, to me, is that we get asked often and I know I never quite know what to say! It will be good to get a policy identified-I would think we would either have "rigid" requirements or very specific minimal requirements that include a community selection process in the event a site meets those minimal requirements. All these inputs are good; hopefully we'll get some time to write this up. But, in all honesty, there are a lot of policies that need to be developed and I'm not sure how soon anyone will focus on this one.

        Loading editor
    • This forum was opened for general discussion. At this point, it is informational as no one has drafted an official "link" policy. Since there have been no entries, this will be closed unless users would like to open the discussion again (will be closed in 24 hours and moved to archive).

        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.