I think it's time to retire the Facebook page. There hasn't been a single post since we've forked (so all links go to Fandom), and every status update is just a clone from our tweets. Barely anyone uses Facebook as a gaming platform compared to Discord/Twitter/etc. Of the three page admins users, only Gaz is the active one.
I propose we archive the page: We post a final update saying that the page is inactive and our other offsite media are much more popular (linking to RS:OFFSITE). All page admins (except Gaz) are removed as admins. We also change the damn icon to a newer logo.
I guess it's silly that my proposal would be revitalising the page to some extent, so I'm open to anything (including just deleting the page).
Archive page, don't delete - The only argument I can see for deleting it is because practically every post has links to Fandom, but I think it has some nice existential value. 12:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
And now its watch has ended - I've got the same mixed feelings that Haidro expresses above. So either deleting it or archiving it, is good.12:29, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Delete - Firstly props to Hairdo for putting in some thought into a creative title. But at this point we might as well just delete it, I don't think anyone would want that page to represent us. If we are to archive it, perhaps we can copy it to a page on the wiki (I'm not sure how technically feasible this is.) --LiquidTalk 23:45, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Support reducing/archiving - I'd prefer to keep the page as the presence of a RuneScape wiki on Facebook, rather than removing it entirely. If we want to make this more static (and presuming we don't want to go through and edit/fix links in old posts), my suggestion would be to hide or delete all/most of the old posts. It appears that posts can be deleted in bulk from a page's Publishing Tools area (slightly old tutorial). (I'm not sure whether some sort of privacy settings could hide the posts from visitors, I couldn't find an obvious way to do that.) As far as what's left behind, I agree with linking to RuneScape:Off-site (and updating the icon). I suspect we should probably also prevent new posts/comments (etc.) if taking the archiving route - Rawny (talk) 19:53, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Delete - Sorry suckerberg23:07, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Delete - cambridge analytica stole our data23:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
- Archive - As per statements below mine for defensive purposes. Shame that it seems necessary in this day and age. :( Badassiel (talk) 23:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Delete - Facebook: ran by lizard people - Wikia: ran by lizard people - coincidence?!?!?!03:31, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Archive page, don't delete - This may be unlikely, but outright deleting the page opens up the path for someone else to create a new RS Wiki facebook page that could contain phishing links or, if Fandom wanted to, continuously updated links to their wiki. I think it's safer to retain control of the RS Wiki "brand" on facebook, even if it's not updated, and not open the landscape for potential threats. I would support Rawny's suggestion of hiding/deleting most of the old posts and just having a post link to RS:OS.03:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Archive page, don't delete pls Death :3 09:19, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Archive -11:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Support archive, oppose delete Per others above (Rawny, Rune14, et. al.) Bring it into line with current standards (logo etc) and retain it as a placeholder, remove old posts, prevent new posts, etc. If for some reason there is no feasable way to archive, I could potentially support deletion but not at this time.18:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Archive - Definitely don't want a fake clone popping up with phishing links. It could still happen currently, but as it is now it's easy to point out the creation dates. -- F-Lambda (talk) 23:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Actaul question - If we were to archive it, what content would we be saving and where would we be putting it? As said in the introduction, most of it would be Fandom links and copies of Twitter posts. Coelacanth0794 Talk 00:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- I guess it's less of an archive and more of a retire. 02:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, archive might have been a bit of a misnomer. I think the simplest solution would be to first prevent any new posts/comments (etc.), followed by tweaking the about page to stop mentioning management by admins (except possibly Gaz) and removing the description of posts coming from Twitter. Then, delete all the posts, notes, events, and timeline photos (seems to be a single image with a comment that has out-of-date links). Finally, add an updated logo and a single post that directs to the wiki and referencing RuneScape:Off-site for anyone looking to communicate with other wiki folks off-site - Rawny (talk) 09:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Archive/Delete - Actually unsure what could be done, on one hand it does link to fandom site, on the other, its part of history. Perhaps the best thing to do it update icon like comment said above, then add a few updates telling people about the move to here. We should at least hope people will see it, and if they didn't know about the move, to come here. I suggest you could put a post about One Small Wiki Favour, telling them you can get bonds, may be post about the fork so people have insight on it. That said, I might be more supportive of archiving it, updating a few posts more. 14:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment/Notice of intent - Since I'm probably the one going to close/enact this thread, I'm just going to say that since this looks like a retire/archive/whatever consensus, I'm going to leave this a few more days so that I can get a few more comments on whether the old posts should be removed or not. Please let me know your thoughts.17:53, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Archive - 'tis a shit site anyhow.23:26, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Delete the auld posts - Nae a particularly big fan of having so many links to fandom prominently displayed on that page, plus they're on our twitter feed anyway so they'd still be archived Ciphrius Kane (talk) 03:07, 3 June 2019 (UTC)