hug0905 wrote: Jake the Autistic 11 Year Old. Seems legit.

Fancy how the official Wikia staff cannot maintain their own Wiki.

Exactly my point. It's quickly deteriorating:

The old CB wiki should go down, and stay down. It has no reason to be up, and honestly, it sucks.

The Gamepedia one is better.

The FNaF wiki, I'm happy to see it like that. Shows how fucking stupid some people on there are.

SUPER EDIT:

HOLY SHIT, LOOK AT ALL THE ADMINS/OWNER OF THE FNaF WIKI. THEY LOST THEIR RANKS, AND PERMISSIONS.

SyphenTV wrote:The old CB wiki should go down, and stay down. It has no reason to be up, and honestly, it sucks.

The Gamepedia one is better.

The FNaF wiki, I'm happy to see it like that. Shows how fucking stupid some people on there are.

SUPER EDIT:

HOLY SHIT, LOOK AT ALL THE ADMINS/OWNER. THEY LOST THEIR RANKS, AND PERMISSIONS.

Yeah... Wikia are getting paranoid over the wikis with a Gamepedia/better equivalent, ESPECIALLY poor old SCP:CB.

That's why the Wikia wiki has gone to such shit. Juan, CommanderMark and the rest all lost their permissions after they questioned a clearly corrupt action that Wikia performed. I meanwhile sent a second request, worded much differently than my first request, and I hope they at least take my suggestion into consideration and dont brush me off with the old "Wikia b gud" attitude.

KirbyMario12345 wrote:ESPECIALLY poor old SCP:CB.

Trust me, there have been more extreme cases then our wiki.

KirbyMario12345 wrote:Juan, CommanderMark and the rest

Juanjpro was never an admin on the old wiki iirc.

CommanderPro100 wrote:

KirbyMario12345 wrote:ESPECIALLY poor old SCP:CB.

Trust me, there have been more extreme cases then our wiki.

KirbyMario12345 wrote:Juan, CommanderMark and the rest

Juanjpro was never an admin on the old wiki iirc.

Alright. I made a few mistakes in my post, but you get my point.
Gamepedia is still best wiki We can only hope that we can eventually get the message through their thick skulls that the SCP Wikia should not stay up, just for that "extra revanooz"

To be honest, I never liked the Gamepedia migration, and most "elder users" like myself agree it was pretty unnecessary.

Absence wrote:To be honest, I never liked the Gamepedia migration, and most "elder users" like myself agree it was pretty unnecessary.

It came down to Regalis wanting a cleaner, less cluttered wiki, but I still respect your opinion.

KirbyMario12345 wrote:
It came down to Regalis wanting a cleaner, less cluttered wiki, but I still respect your opinion.

Really? I think you're confusing the Regalis thing with the FIRST migration. You see, in 2012, the first wiki was made, Regalis said he didn't like it, so Mark made a new one in 2013. Later that year, Mark himself decided it should be remade into Gamepedia. I don't think Regalis ever requested the Gamepedia migration, just the first remake.

Absence wrote:

KirbyMario12345 wrote:
It came down to Regalis wanting a cleaner, less cluttered wiki, but I still respect your opinion.

Really? I think you're confusing the Regalis thing with the FIRST migration. You see, in 2012, the first wiki was made, Regalis said he didn't like it, so Mark made a new one in 2013. Later that year, Mark himself decided it should be remade into Gamepedia. I don't think Regalis ever requested the Gamepedia migration, just the first remake.

Oh, but he did like it.

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3044&p=100360#p100360

Look at the date of both of my recent posts before reading the most recent one, you'll probably feel like how I felt.










It took them 3 years to close it...