Replacement filing cabinet
Archived discussion
This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance. If you wish to revisit this topic, please bring it up again in a new thread.
Forums: IndexCommunity discussionsBattles Revival | Forum new Post


So I was thinking we could have battles resurrected. Cheseburgermac (talk) 11:47, May 19, 2018 (UTC)

What's your rationale for reviving the battles? Have you addressed the arguments raised in Forum:Retiring the battles and Forum:Could we reopen fanon battles?.
On another note, please stop creating simple, one-sentence discussion threads for things that require proper reasoning and explanation to process. They're simply wasting people's time. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:51, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
k6ka has a point in that we've been discussing the issue of reopening the battles before. I would only be open to reviving the battles if there was significant interest in the community. Right now, there doesn't seem to be any. And there's no point to the battles if Simmers don't participate. Ѧüя◎ґ (talk) 14:24, May 19, 2018 (UTC)
I'm not opposed to reviving Battles if there is a sufficient interest in bringing them back. However, I suspect that when people suggest "bring back Battles," or really, whenever anyone suggests that a certain feature of the past be brought back, what they really mean is that someone else should bring it back. I think many folks do not realize or appreciate how time-consuming managing some of these features can be, especially if the features are designed to operate on a specific timeline or require periodic regular updating. All of us have real lives, and it's impractical to expect one or two editors to maintain a feature 100% of the time. Things like battles, weekly newsletters, featured content... all these things are possible, and may even be good things to have, but they require more than just a handful of editors willing to put the work and time into maintaining them. Additionally, many a good idea can fail over time when people lose interest - just like Battles itself did in its first incarnation. That loss of community interest also translates to a loss of interest in the people who work to maintain the feature, until eventually the feature is hardly maintained at all (this in turn causes a further loss of community participation, resulting in a downward spiral).
So, I'd support reviving Battles if the following conditions are true: 1) there is a significant chunk of editors who are willing to put the time and energy into reviving it and maintaining it in perpetuity, and 2) there is more than just a passing interest in the community at large in favor of its return. -- LostInRiverview talk · blog · contribs 14:34, May 22, 2018 (UTC)


I'm closing this thread due to inactivity. Please start a new thread if necessary. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 15:54, February 16, 2019 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.