Talk:Nukapedia

File:Wiki-wordmark.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Wiki-wordmark.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:07, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --92.145.167.145 (talk) 01:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

A conflict opposes members from fallout wikia and the vault on gamepedia, making this deletion questionable.

Any conflict is not relevant to the notability of an article. 86.184.183.73 (talk) 02:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --92.145.167.145 (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

This deletion is motivated by a personal conflict between users from wikia and gamepedia.

Any personal dispute is not relevant to the notability of an article. 86.184.183.73 (talk) 02:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --92.145.167.145 (talk) 01:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism

It is not vandalism to question the notability of an article. Disputing the deletion 3 times, twice for the same reason, might be. Is the page notable or self promotion?. It is a site with few active users 86.184.183.73 (talk) 02:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because this site is not only still very active it is constantly verifying and expanding on its content.--Ant2242 (talk) 02:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

The request for deletion is part of an aggressive campaign motivated by personal conflict, as is the demand that notability is established. As The Vault was already covered in mainstream gaming press due to its extensive nature and release of numerous materials obtained by the editors from inside source, the notability is well established.

The identity of the person responsible for the tag is Eden2012, who has deliberately and maliciously tried to abuse Wikipedia's Deletion policies to remove this. This is yet another example of harassment The Vault has endured at the keyboard of said user. I don't believe that a challenge to the notability or the very presence of the article borne out of personal spite can be sustained, due to the agenda of the person who puts forward this challenge.

I'd like to point out that the article has stood unchallenged for years, with proper citations establishing its notability. Tagaziel (talk) 07:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

• The site has few active users
• Any personal dispute is irrelevant to whether the article meets notability guidelines. 86.184.183.73 (talk) 15:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Arguing against a person rather than the argument seems to be an example of an Ad_hominem#Abusive Falacy. The "Test of Time" or appeal to tradition is additonally a falacical argument. 80.254.158.12 (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Not going to be deleted, I suspect the speedy tag was placed in bad faith. There are plenty of sources and coverage here, according to a past AfD it's notable. Яehevkor ✉ 19:03, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Independent Fallout Wiki

Should this page's scope include the Independent Fallout Wiki? If not, then should we discuss this subject in the past tense (due to abandonment)? I can't figure out what the scope of this page should be. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 29 November 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 16:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

---

Fallout Wiki → Nukapedia – The Nukapedia wiki brands itself primarily as Nukapedia, so I feel like this page name would be more accurate C0NN1E Beep (talk) 21:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Steel1943 (talk) 15:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 16:06, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion thread was initiated on WP:RMTR. Steel1943 (talk) 15:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

The main page [1] still says "Fallout Wiki" in the main page title. I'd have thought the sourcing still supports that name too, so I think this is far from uncontroversial. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

There are two Fallout wikis now: one called Nukapedia, the Fallout Wiki, and then an Independent Fallout Wiki. Given the two share similar names, I think Fallout Wiki should serve as a disam page, so as not to confuse people. That, or mentioning both wikis on the same page. Cheers! C0NN1E Beep (talk) 23:49, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Are there articles here for the other two wikis? – robertsky (talk) 05:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Nukapedia occupies the current Fallout Wiki page, with no mention of the Independent Fallout Wiki, while the latter wiki has no kind of pages at all. C0NN1E Beep (talk) 15:16, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

@C0NN1E Beep, Amakuru, and Robertsky: Ping current participants to let them know the discussion has been moved here. Steel1943 (talk) 15:01, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Steel1943: why did you move it here? the conversation looked to have gone cold. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 15:14, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Amakuru: The nom has a valid point since subtopics/subpages of Fandom (website) can be confusing to figure out/name in general. That, and usually, these topics do not pass WP:GNG, but this article has survived multiple WP:AFDs. Figure if we are gonna name this thing, might as well get it right. (I'm "neutral" though.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Just to reiterate, there's two "Fallout Wiki"'s now; the one on Fandom at fallout.fandom.com called "Nukapedia, the Fallout Wiki," and the one at fallout.wiki called the "Independent Fallout Wiki." I suggest either having information for both on the same page in an objective manner, or moving this page to "Nukapedia" and changing "Fallout Wiki" to a disam page to allow room for a page for the "Independent Fallout Wiki." However, as outlined above, I don't think either places actually pass the notability guidelines. That's a matter I'd rather leave to staff though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by C0NN1E Beep (talk • contribs) 22:04, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@C0NN1E Beep: This article seems to refer to the topic you call "Nukepedia, the Fallout Wiki". The other topic, "Independent Fallout Wiki", does not seem to exist on Wikipedia and probably should not, meaning a disambiguation page would be pointless since only one applicable page exists on Wikipedia. The question here ... in this discussion ... is if the appropriate name for this article is "Nukapedia" or "Fallout Wiki", which is what this discussion is meant to determine. Steel1943 (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Steel1943: Right, yes. I think it should be moved to "Nukapedia."C0NN1E Beep (talk) 22:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

• Support The recent Kotaku articles about it do refer to it as "Nukapedia", establishing that it is the common name for it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.