Forum:Uncyclopedia's move from Wikia

From Uncyclomedia, the UnMeta-wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Forum: Home > Uncyclopedia's move from Wikia

I heard rumors (Here and here) of Uncyclopedia exit from Wikia. Already expected this because a few months ago the censorship policy was bothering users Inciclopedia too. However, questions have to do because I know it first hand and taking into account that the actual situation is the situation facing small uncyclopedias.

  1. If the site is hosted on an independent server or Carat server.
  2. If there is a consensus adoption of interlinks between the various uncys created after the entry of the Wikia site. Although they have a slight knowledge of Desgalipedia, Çciclopédia as wikis and other small uncys are still unknown.
  3. The interlink af: UnMeta belongs in the Uncyclopedia language Afrikaaner while the server Wikia belonged to Uncyclopedia. That will have to be resolved.

Already, I wish at this time and Desgalipedia and Çciclopédia recognize the independence of our older sister.

Rhubella selo-02.pngRhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie 2,496 preppieditsRhubella selo-01.png 00:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

These aren't rumours. It's true now. They factually moved to independent servers:
I asked Athyria/Lyrithia/Isarra your 2nd question and she answered she will accept all interwikis of active communities. They've had a lot to do last days, so the interwiki table might be a later concern. I'll be watching it: if it isn't altered soon, I'll definitely ask the admins over there for an update. Since we're already massively linking to them, an interwiki table update should be peanuts | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 12:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, thanks>. Rhubella selo-02.pngRhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie 2,496 preppieditsRhubella selo-01.png 16:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
They weren't kicked out... they got upset and left because big, bad Wikia censored all of their pictures of boobies and put some annoying disclaimers on the site. Wikia is keeping the old site open as a direct competitor to the new wiki. Would you expect anything less?
The current situation with the interwikis from the en: fork is en:Forum:Links to our site must be updated ASAP and en:Uncyclopedia:Language survey 2012. It is not, at this point, a question of "having a lot to do" or "the interwiki table might be a later concern". An admin there is actively removing all interwikis from en: to Uncyclopedia languages with fewer than 500 pages or with a small number of active users, even while en: (as a new site which didn't exist three days ago) is desparately asking for inbound links from other Uncyclopedias. There are also redlinks to meta: (which works fine in Wikia's version of Uncyclopedia, of all places) and forget about illogicopedia: or anything else here that's outside the Uncyclopedia project. As far as I know, gl: might still work but links to all the other small languages you mention are deleted or broken on the new en: fork. af: just redlinks instead of reaching any version of Afrikaans. The babel: namespace which used to serve as an incubator on en: is also gone or mostly gone.
I'd done what I can to ensure that outbound links from wikis hosted here had the new en: and (if it's not in use as the project: namespace) uncyclopedia: URL instead of (which has a handful of users remaining but is beginning to show signs of vandalism). Ultimately, however, it is the individual admins on any of the non-Wikia projects who have the special:interwiki page and decide what to link or not link. It makes it awkward (but not quite impossible) to run '' pywikipediabot scripts to update links between different languages of the same page if a language prefix exists on one wiki and not another. That's already an issue with the pt: / gl: situation (where this particular pair do not link to each other, something of which a 'bot likely would not be aware) but is likely to be a much larger problem on en: Carlb (talk) 01:24, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Babel namespace[edit]

On the old en.Uncyclopedia, there was babel: as a namespace which served as an "incubator" to store languages which only had a few pages until they could be expanded into actual wikis. In early 2006, this was several hundred pages of Taiwan regular-script Chinese and about two hundred articles in Brazilian Portuguese. Go back further (2005, when was independently-hosted) and there would have been Polish, Hebrew or any of a number of unusual languages. All the major ones were removed as they all have their own wikis. That leaves this sort of tiny collection (from the list on's mainpage):

Bookshelf-40x20.png en.uncyclopedia Babelpages Bookshelf-40x20.png

Anglo SaxonBurmeseNnapulitanoVènetoTiếng ViệtXhosa

Bookshelf-40x20.png Uncycs hosted in UnMeta Bookshelf-40x20.png

EuskaraEstremeñuInterlinguaLingua Franca NovaNovialPrūsiskanதமிழ்

A few (ang, nap, vi) had interwiki table links which still point to the old - although I suspect ang: is just a reskin of en:'s mainpage into Old English and not an actual project. Some of the others appear with :en:Babel in the links, which are now broken as the fork to did not retain the babel: pages.

Any new pages of this sort are being created here on meta:, not on en:, which is just as well - but should the few existing babel: pages (such as Vietnam, which has a main page and little or nothing else) be brought over here so that "en.uncyclopedia Babelpages" can be removed from the mainpage once and for all? I can't see creating wikis for these, but their "left behind" status in the en: move is a potential problem given the situation there. Carlb (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I know well that they were not excluded from Wikia and was an action of consensus among administrators, like Uncyclopedia Russian output. However, I do not think it affects much in importance that no petitions today in uncy Vietnamese, and even in Anglo-Saxon. However, it would be a good utility to remove such interlinks appear when the opportunity.
In the case of Desgalipedia, as there are currently two active users always have to modify the forecast when we pass each hundred of articles. One thing that occurred every 3 months or so. Now, with early predictions every 2.5 months. In this aspect, only gl: growth has averaged apparently the same uncyclopedias over 2500 articles. Thus, not worry about the delay. It is true that users have much work to do after the change. Rhubella selo-02.pngRhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie 2,496 preppieditsRhubella selo-01.png 14:37, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
For something small like "one page in Vietnamese", I'd suggest just moving it from en.wikia to meta: and forgetting about it. We keep the page so we can continue to claim "Uncyclopedia exists in 70 (or however many) languages" - a claim which does appear in Wikipedia's article about us.
I'm a little more concerned about this new en: refusing to link to viable languages just because they're under 500 pages. That decision appears (like the situation with the pt:/gl: pair) to be a political decision, but in this case many languages are missing so that an '' robot like nl:special:contributions/Hymie le robot would only create huge numbers of red links on the wikis where links to specific languages are missing. I shall not be having 'Hymie' (or any other pywikipediabot) use the '' script to make links between different language wikis until en: fixes their configuration - which they broke deliberately by removing all of the small languages. Carlb (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I saw the damage already caused in the home with several intelinks red. They could have at least preserved the uncys Wikia that did not meet the recommendation as Nunyepedia and Oisquipedia. On the other hand, do not know how to uncy Croatian managed to eliminate almost 500 articles and drop to slightly more than 270 articles and still maintain the interlink. Moreover, the political decision favors wikis that are well prepared and more active, with absolute certainty, many of these wikis are inactive or sporadic editions.
I do not think they forgot us. I think we should re-activate and explode their server.
Certainly no uncy, including Çciclopedia, can be accepted at this time. Another important thing, the main pages for uncys Extremadura and the Basque exist here.

Rhubella selo-02.pngRhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie 2,496 preppieditsRhubella selo-01.png 00:30, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki status January 15[edit]

I have been keeping an eye on their interwiki table and Athyria/Lyrithya is still deleting some. The most important one which was deleted is common:... I do not know how this will evolve, but BizzeeBeever promised me he would put all iw back. I really hope all iw will be permanently there, however, I feel they might mice in the list again as soon as they believe we're not insisting anymore. Neither I think "they" is the correct subject, because this seems to be a Athyria/Lyrithya-only issue :-/ Let's wait and see if BB can keep his promise | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 03:48, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

"Nonsensical unused interwiki - maybe not as dumb as calling the german ones random related languages, and having four different variants for the same wiki, but still pretty damn dumb."

~ Athyria/Lyrithya

This quote shows how unaware some people are when talking about languages and regions. Personal intrest is clearly visible as well, calling something "dumb". Bar: righteously deserves that iw (southern tongue of Germany and common language in Austria) and Nds: was given to a wiki that was founded in the Bundesland of Westfalen (or Niedersachsen, not sure). Nds is actually a slang-variant of German, spoken in the northern regions of Germany. We can give them a dozen arguments why they should add it, but I fear it will not help | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 04:04, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Sadly, this looks to be political. There are longstanding differences between me and one or two admins on en: regarding "deletionism", a pattern in which I'd look at en: after ignoring it for a while, type in a name of a page which I remembered as mildly amusing years ago and get nothing but a big fat red link and "this page has been deleted" (usually not by VfD but by some admin killing it because of a 'stub', 'fix' or 'forest fire week' tag). There are several hundred articles in Illogicopedia with the 'moved from Uncyc' tag, I have thousands more stored on an uncyc mirror site and will not be removing these. At one point, one user was demanding I turn over the entire Illogicopedia database (including the userlist) with the intention of moving that site elsewhere. There was no consensus on the wiki itself to move, so the move never happened. A week before the en.uncyclopedia move, one individual revoked my admin status on en: (which I had since 2005) along with many other once-active admins; any attempt to discuss the matter immediately wandered back to the question of all those deleted articles and went nowhere.
Certainly, to play politics with interwiki links at this point is dumb; because of the move, needs those links more desperately than anyone and needs them now. I'm really not sure why this is happening at this time. I realise that the whole question of wikis in other languages has never been of much importance to en: - it was amusing to claim to have a long list of languages in order to parody Wikipedia's tower of Babel but each is ultimately a separate, independent project and each has relatively little to do with the others.
Not sure what's up with Bavarian/Low German (bar: nds:) as those are huge projects and completely independent. If has existed for a whole ten days, and has the opportunity to exchange interwiki links to two established sites which were founded 2004 (predating every Uncyclopedia, as en: fr: were 2005), wouldn't they jump at the chance to do this? I have no stake in the matter and don't spracken Deutsch, but en: needs independents like ko: ru: bar: nds:
I'm currently in a "wait and see" position when it comes to en: The community's objections to Wikia censorship of content are legitimate and a move long overdue. Only time will tell whether this new site is (or is not) the answer. Carlb (talk) 15:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
The main problem is that one person is solely deciding whether things go through or not. Other users/admins agree, or more realistic: don't care at all. Athyria is a respected user there because of her technical knowledge and whatnot, but she definitely lacks strategy and long-term plans. Like you say, the more sites that point to the new en: the more popularity it will grant, so I don't understand the reluctancy. I believe it has something to do with a certain fear for attracting spammers from the socalled "empty boxes". Even then, I think this is an excuse for reasons I don't know (yet) | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 16:21, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Oddly, Alexa seems to be counting the number of unique domains with links into the new site at - so even joke domains like Desciclopédia's "" (which means "search.there") or long-abandoned wikis all count as one more "unique" site linking in, while * just counts as one domain because of the manner that all communities have been forced onto subdomains there. Carlb (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
en.uncyc is rising quite fast in Google's search result ranking. It's ranked 87th per this moment. Last time I checked (some days ago) it was 197th or something. Perhaps Google might have been saving my search behaviour, however I never access a wiki through a search engine... Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 19:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Strangely none of you noticed that the last edition held in UnMeta page, excluding the three of us and spambots fair was held by Uncyclopedia's russian bureaucrat.
From what I'm reading here, I do not understand if the issue was the Russian Uncyclopedia be advised of the change of his English colleague or the reverse. Well, give a look and check if the need'll see if there is chance to help. Rhubella selo-02.pngRhubella Marie, the rat sockpreppie 2,496 preppieditsRhubella selo-01.png 22:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki status January 24[edit]

Every interwiki link should be in Uncyc's table now. I hope it will last. I consider this matter as over, unless there will be new discussions about removing the iw again | Cartoonist | Spit it out (talk) | E-mail | UnMeta | 03:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)