Thread:ChrisN34/@comment-39845457-20190830220814/@comment-39845457-20190902191946

Honestly, it all comes down to whether or not you want the wiki to look professional or not. The vast majority of FANDOM communities are run by a disorganized, fast and loose conglomeration of high-school aged kids with poor grammar and idea of what makes a good/bad wiki. I mean no disrespect, but if you compare the Fallout Wikia and the Fallout Gamepedia wiki, the Elder Scrolls Wikia versus the UESP wiki, or the Overwatch Wikia versus the Gamepedia Overwatch wiki; you will notice that the Gamepedia/externally hosted wikis on average far beat the wikia wikis in terms of quality; as does the UESP especially in regards to the Elder Scrolls wikia (They get the era names wrong and copy/paste information from the UESP; not to mention have a terrible category system and barely any formatting rules among their pages). This is the reason why almost all mods and modders reference the UESP wiki, and almost all Overwatch players prefer the Gamepedia wiki, and so forth.

I do NOT want the Cyberpunk Wiki to become another of the many disorganized, unprofessional wikias hosted by FANDOM. I want the Cyberpunk wiki to become the definitive source of Cyberpunk lore and be referenced by the game's creators, actors, and author Mike Pondsmith himself. You will note, Emilia Clarke, Felicity Jones, among many other actors frequently site Wookieepedia as the site they use to gather information for their roles in the films. If Wookieepedia looked like the Elder Scrolls wiki I highly doubt as many actors would view it as a "reliable" source. The same goes for Todd Howard, who has specifically stated in an interview that he uses the UESP wiki, and not the Elder Scrolls Wikia when he needs to reference something from the games.

I hope I am not coming off as too harsh when I say this, as I only present this case out of my respect for the franchise and my wish to see it in the best light possible. For it is throughout my fervent editing experience that a quality wiki attracts quality wiki editors; while an unprofessional wiki deters quality wiki editors. If I do not believe that a wiki has the standards necessary for me to invest my time in contributing to, why should I bother trying to improve it? We are at the make or break point in this wiki's history. What we decide now and how to organize this wiki will have lasting repercussions for the rest of its lifetime. Changing its course will require more effort the longer we deliberate.

With respect, D. Boots