Category talk:Read-only
Table of contents |
'Real' wikis?[edit]
None of these are REAL wikis. Elassint 17:02, 6 December 2007 (EST)
- They're using wiki engines though, that's why they are included. Felix Pleşoianu | talk 10:12, 7 December 2007 (EST)
- Hi! I agree that in the sense of wiki as we understand they are not, maybe we should mention something about that on the category? (I also agree with Felix Pleşoianu) Best, MarkDilley
- I know this might sound radical, but I suggest that you delete EVERYTHING in this category. It does not matter if they are using wiki engines, that does not automatically make them wikis, and if they are not wikis they are inappropriate for wikiindex. --Elassint, 07 1 2008 talk
- Hi Elassint, I am not sure how to proceed to see if there is consensus around this subject. Do you have any ideas? Best, MarkDilley
Why not leave them here with a strong warning that they are not true wikis? Proxima Centauri 13:15, 5 July 2008 (EDT)
- I think that would be like putting conservative propaganda on Liberapedia with a "strong warning" that the pages are conservative propaganda and deleting the pages might take to long. Elassint, 07 5 2008 talk
Elassint, how would you categorize a wiki which was used for a conference and after the conference they closed the wiki to Read-only. Or if the community around a wiki disappeared and the systems administrator didn't want to battle spam anymore but wanted to keep the information accessible? I think both of these case are real examples. Best, MarkDilley
I agree these are not wiki's[edit]
I've clicked a few of these at random this one can't be a wiki can it? This one looks like it's dead, and so does this one and this one. I think this should be re-addressed. (Oh, and Hi, Elassint and Proxima - nice to see that you're keeping busy :-))--Bob M 11:59, 31 December 2008 (EST)
- Just working through the A's AgileEdge Wiki looks doubtful.--Bob M 17:42, 31 December 2008 (EST)
