@ThePokémonGamer I've learned that the hard way, through you and Twitter. I came across as rather rude on several occasions, until someone told me how it sounded...

200% truths have been spoken by you right there TPG.

To me, there's more of a discussion to forking. If people dislike changes, I understand. I was a Monobook fundamentalist in my early days but learned to put that aside while utilizing Fandom. But what I wouldn't excuse is the attitudes some would have, like they left their original fellow English wiki (whom they did little to support during the decade of being on Fandom) and went to fill in the void that Poketecha left upon shut down.

Since NIWA works the opposite, they probably get more triggered seeing disclaimers of their text being reused, which would probably not be obvious to them in most cases. Because when it's done right, they can't find any vulnerabilities to stretch the terms of the CC BY-SA to their liking.

@Ellis99 wizard ways? yeah it's shockingly accurate. i was surprised Gemini got most of the names right when there were differences. I'm always responsible to manually review, but still, it's incredible. Total gamechanger.

@Gematarix Thank you for the comment before ;)

(At least Super Mergist Wiki and Filb/WikiDex's contents have a chance of survival thanks to the very license their text/contents are released under; I'm mainly talking about Bulbapedia.)

Yw

I hope the wiki doesnt see the disclaimers as "poisoning" the article. It's just an accurate reflection of cc by-sa, and I'm certain it has everything for full transparency: title, source (site name), a link to the license, and history (including a local copy). Reflects my personality of discontentment at the stringent attribution requirements too, even if I understand why they exist. :P Over 350 articles on the Mario Wiki on Fandom already have an SMW disclaimer (accompanied by imported history).

I can think of cases where if NIWA wikis followed the rules, they'd have those, but they want to promote an "all original" image. the Donkey Kong coverage merged from dkwiki.com into mariowiki.com doesn't have the disclaimers like it should. Jiggywikki is lacking some of the Rare.fandom.com disclaimers that it needs because some of the text was from there.

Then again I believe i did see Wikipedia disclaimers on PokeWiki and WikiDex before. PokeWiki has one on their Nintendo DS article.

It actually enhances the wiki's credibility and transparency, if anything.

Looks neat and tidy, and precisely like what an academic paper would do when citing the origin of information.

Glad you like it. hopefully fandom does as well

I've locked Goh's Pinsir due to persistent editing to insert false information about its gender. In all honesty, I think it should've been done sooner, but I think because there haven't been any recent edits over its gender, none of us have thought to lock it XD