Archive 1 is here!

Special template...

Is there a way to specify how many pages a user has created, in the vein of the "editcount" feature that is on mine and Ice's pages? I've created 129/201, about 65% of the entire wiki's pages, as of this message. :)

Hint.png Octavarium64: Amen, I say: not 8 times but 8 x 8 times. Hint.png 03:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

How to clean out the old images registry?

Working on StrategyWiki, I figured out the best ways to delete and edit old images. The problem is, I've never been a sysop on any sort of site before. (Thanks very much, Craig!)

So is it possible to delete old versions of images without touching the new ones, even if their name is the same? Octavarium64 18:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

It just hadn't been clear how to delete specific versions of uploaded images, without touching the ones that are being used. I found it eventually on the admin guide, but I wasn't going to just charge in without knowing what I was doing. I did know how to delete unused redirects [Firetrap (CCLP2 level)] and entire images properly, but not specific outdated versions of images. Octavarium64 17:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Reverted edits and rights

Hi Craiga2124,

It is Fandom's policy that any wiki community that decides to leave for a new host, or to host their wiki independently going forward, needs to leave behind the wiki they created.

Once you decide to leave (which is your right, of course), we ask that you don't vandalize the wiki you leave behind, but rather leave it intact for any other Fandom users who might still want to work on it. That way, anyone who wants to stay can stay, and the wiki has a chance to attract a new community after you've abandoned it.

Yes, there is the risk of it becoming outdated, and of it becoming a competition to your now-independent wiki. That's a risk any community takes, though, when building a wiki with one host and then starting up a copy of that wiki elsewhere.

If no one adopts this wiki and you keep actively updating your independent wiki, it will eventually outrank this one on Google, attracting visitors to the most up-to-date information. Mira Laime  (help forum | blog) 16:53, September 10, 2019 (UTC)

Given the "requirement" that this wiki remain intact, the best solution would be to have something auto-update this wiki to match the significantly more up to date other wiki. However with nobody able to administrate and people banned from editing for something that seemed entirely reasonable, that's impossible now. It's a question of priorities- for the community, the priority is in making sure people get accurate information. Even in the case of other people taking up this wiki, unless both wikis are checking the other one for updates, there will be missing or incorrect information here.

The bans, then were for trying to leave a redirection instead of making a deletion request, where a redirect would seem to be the best solution. I suppose I should ask if a redirecting template on the top of every page would be against policy as well as that could also resolve this issue. Ihavenoname248 (talk) 21:19, September 10, 2019 (UTC)

For Fandom, the priority is to protect any (non-spam) content once it has been created on Fandom. We consider it as belonging to the community of all Fandom users, and want any wiki, once it exists on our platform, to have the best possible chance to thrive. That's why we allow neither the replacement of content with redirect notices, nor do we allow a notice on every page that asks visitors to go somewhere else. Either would reduce the chances of this wiki to attract a new active community that keeps it up-to-date.
I know this can be frustrating for a community of editors who started on Fandom, left us for whatever reason, and who feel like they're leaving a mess behind that they no longer have any influence over. I'm afraid we still can't allow wide-spread redirect notices. One link on one page that's not the main page (e.g. the main admin's profile to explain why they've gone inactive) is okay, but anything that prevents a new active community from forming is not allowed.
I hope that makes sense! Mira Laime  (help forum | blog) 21:41, September 10, 2019 (UTC)

I'm a long-time (sleeping) follower of Chip's Challenge.  I'd like to say the following:
  • This wiki is no longer doing the job it was meant to do: provide free, accessible, and reliable resources about Chip's Challenge to fans who want to learn more about the game.  That is now being done directly by the Chip's Challenge community's new wiki at
  • If you have any doubts that the move is not unanimous by the Chip's Challenge community, please check out their current homes at and the discord server (  You do not even need an account to read everything
  • Thanks to legacy, this old and not-up-to-date wiki is not letting the new wiki get the attention it deserves.  Mira Laime says Fandom (erstwhile Wikia) would like to give this wiki 'the best possible chance to thrive'.  However, considering that this is now little more than a parasite which exists only for the financial benefit of Wikia, does it really deserve it?
To the Fandom staff:  this wiki is obviously very small fish for you, and can't really affect your bottom line.  Please do the right thing and allow this wiki to be deleted. Budugoo (talk) 10:06, September 14, 2019 (UTC)
Remember that "the community" doesn't just consist of editors and active participants on Discord. For every such user, there are several more who just read, and who you can't see. Fandom knows there are more people still here than the ones participating in this debate or even making edits on the wiki, because we have traffic data showing us there are a few hundred people coming to this wiki every day. Some of them might like to start editing at some point, and they may prefer to do it on Fandom, for any of the reasons why users generally like building wikis on Fandom.
If you are concerned about users finding outdated information here and not realizing it, you can do two things: We'd allow a note on the main page stating that pages may be outdated, so users are warned, although we'd ask that you not include a redirect to the new wiki. (We can put a notice up for you or unprotect the main page so you can do that yourself.) Secondly, you can keep updating your new wiki, as you're doing anyway, and Google will eventually recognize that it's a better resource and rank it better than this wiki - assuming no new editors are found to update the pages here.
If, down the road, the wiki here has indeed died and no longer receives the views it receives today, and no new editors have appeared, it is feasible for us to close it then. Mira Laime  (help forum | blog) 17:44, September 17, 2019 (UTC)

Would recommend you restore back the correct bureaucrat/admin access levels that users had before so edits can be made to the main page. Unprotecting the main page is not an acceptable option (opens up to "vandalism" or vandalism.) Chip E.png Craiga2124 Talk! Chip W.png 19:32, September 17, 2019 (UTC)

Admin rights have been restored, under the assumption that they will only be used to make productive edits to the wiki (e.g. put a "outdated information" warning on the main page or improve the wiki's current content), but not to install more redirect notices. Bureaucrat rights are only needed to promote others, which isn't necessary if the community has moved away, so they won't be restored. Mira Laime  (help forum | blog) 17:25, September 18, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.