Bureaucrats, checkuser, Interface administrators, interwiki, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), staff, Suppressors, Administrators
83,693
edits
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) (→Category:Private is not consistent a member of Wiki Status: fix red link following page rename) |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "ReadOnly" to "Read-only") Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| (13 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{TOC right}} | {{Talk header}}{{TOC right}} | ||
==dead vs inactive== | ==dead vs inactive== | ||
I see there is a Category:Inactive with a related [[Template:Inactive]], and a [[:Category:Dead]] with a related Template:Wiki dead. Is there any useful difference between "inactive" status vs "dead" status? --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] 09:30, 7 July 2009 (EDT) | I see there is a Category:Inactive with a related [[Template:Inactive]], and a [[:Category:Dead]] with a related Template:Wiki dead. Is there any useful difference between "inactive" status vs "dead" status? --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] 09:30, 7 July 2009 (EDT) | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
*This template inactive is a drag! Just I encountered a Wiki [[Felix Pleşoianu Wiki]] run by one of our early users here, which was striked out by this template bit quite active indeed. This is the case in more than 15% of Wikis with this template over them. I uncovered lots of them in the recent month. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 17:38, 29 October 2014 (UTC) | *This template inactive is a drag! Just I encountered a Wiki [[Felix Pleşoianu Wiki]] run by one of our early users here, which was striked out by this template bit quite active indeed. This is the case in more than 15% of Wikis with this template over them. I uncovered lots of them in the recent month. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 17:38, 29 October 2014 (UTC) | ||
==[[:Category:Private]] is not consistent a member of Wiki | ==[[:Category:Private]] is not consistent a member of Wiki status== | ||
{{Not|:category: Accessibility}} | {{Not|:category: Accessibility}} | ||
:''(imported from [[WikiIndex talk:Community portal]])'' | :''(imported from [[WikiIndex talk:Community portal]])'' | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
<blockquote>I think here is a change needed. A wiki could be dormant and private at the same time like [[Bible Wiki (BibleWiki.net)]]. Private belongs to another aspect similar to editmode. One has to create the aspect "accessibility" or anything else.<br>{public|private|onInvitation|adult|legitimation|etc.} which defines the scope of onlookers not of editors. Naturally the scope of editmode is narrower than "accessibility" the mode nnames would have quite a cut set. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC)</blockquote> | <blockquote>I think here is a change needed. A wiki could be dormant and private at the same time like [[Bible Wiki (BibleWiki.net)]]. Private belongs to another aspect similar to editmode. One has to create the aspect "accessibility" or anything else.<br>{public|private|onInvitation|adult|legitimation|etc.} which defines the scope of onlookers not of editors. Naturally the scope of editmode is narrower than "accessibility" the mode nnames would have quite a cut set. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 21:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC)</blockquote> | ||
So basically, should [[:Category:Private]] remain a sub-category of [[:Category:Wiki | So basically, should [[:Category:Private]] remain a sub-category of [[:Category:Wiki status]], or should Category:Private be a sub-cat of [[:Category:Wiki Edit Mode]] – or even both? Manorainjan expresses good rationale for a change, and I'm inclined to support him. Another example which lends support for change, is that a wiki can be private, but can also have viggorous activity – which might place it in the [[:Category:Vibrant]] sub-cat of Wiki status. I think if we do move Category:Private under the Category:Wiki Edit Mode umbrella, then it could even be a sub-cat of [[:Category:ByInvitation]]? | ||
Discussions and opinions needed, please! [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 13:25, 10 August 2014 (UTC) | Discussions and opinions needed, please! [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 13:25, 10 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
===Call for clarity=== | ===Call for clarity=== | ||
There are two questions to be dealt with: | There are two questions to be dealt with: | ||
#Is the property '[[:Category:Private|Private]]' really fitting in the same category with {[[:Category:Active|Active]], [[:Category:Dormant|Dormant]], [[:Category:Dead|Dead]], [[:Category: | #Is the property '[[:Category:Private|Private]]' really fitting in the same category with {[[:Category:Active|Active]], [[:Category:Dormant|Dormant]], [[:Category:Dead|Dead]], [[:Category:Needs love|Needs love]], etc.}? | ||
#How should dead or private Wikis be listed; shall they 'disturb'/mix with the listings of active/accessible Wikis? | #How should dead or private Wikis be listed; shall they 'disturb'/mix with the listings of active/accessible Wikis? | ||
I see the discussion as mixed up on both topics which does not allow for solution. therefore I suggest to solve question 1 first and then try for question 2 which in my opinion calls for another kind of [[:Category:Wiki | I see the discussion as mixed up on both topics which does not allow for solution. therefore I suggest to solve question 1 first and then try for question 2 which in my opinion calls for another kind of [[:Category:Wiki status|Wiki-Status]] possibly called 'Category:Wiki Accessibility' [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 16:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
:My inclination is that the designation "Private" has more to do with a wiki's [[:Category:Wiki Edit Mode|EditMode]] than it does with a wiki's Status. I don't think a new "Accessibility" class of categories is needed. That's pretty much what "EditMode" is already. I am in favor is making "Private" one of the options for "EditMode". I suppose the clarification which would need to be made the difference between "[[:Category:ByInvitation|ByInvitation]]" and "Private." To my mind, the former indicates that you could ostensibly obtain an invitation whereas the latter would be reserved for those which are closed to new participants. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 23:34, 13 August 2014 (UTC) | :My inclination is that the designation "Private" has more to do with a wiki's [[:Category:Wiki Edit Mode|EditMode]] than it does with a wiki's Status. I don't think a new "Accessibility" class of categories is needed. That's pretty much what "EditMode" is already. I am in favor is making "Private" one of the options for "EditMode". I suppose the clarification which would need to be made the difference between "[[:Category:ByInvitation|ByInvitation]]" and "Private." To my mind, the former indicates that you could ostensibly obtain an invitation whereas the latter would be reserved for those which are closed to new participants. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 23:34, 13 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
==Overview== | ==Overview== | ||
I'm trying to show here in a table how Wiki | I'm trying to show here in a table how Wiki status relates to Edit Mode and other corresponding categorisations | ||
{|class=wikitable | {|class=wikitable | ||
!progress* / status°||edit mode||account mode*||view mode*||connect mode* | !progress* / status°||edit mode||account mode*||view mode*||connect mode* | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
|SemiActive*||CapchaEdit*||>ConfirmEmail°<br>EmailConfirmAccount*||LoginToViewAny*||>CannotConnect | |SemiActive*||CapchaEdit*||>ConfirmEmail°<br>EmailConfirmAccount*||LoginToViewAny*||>CannotConnect | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Active||LoginToEdit||> | |Active||LoginToEdit||>Login via forum°<br>DerivedAccount*||ViewArchive||ForwardedNoWiki* | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Vibrant||ModeratedEdit*||AdminConfirmAccount*||>NotArchived°<br>NothingToView*||Forwarded2Wiki* | |Vibrant||ModeratedEdit*||AdminConfirmAccount*||>NotArchived°<br>NothingToView*||Forwarded2Wiki* | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Dormant|| | |Dormant||Pay to edit||>ByInvitation°<br>InviteToAccount*||—||— | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Halted*||NoEdit*||>closed (Private)<br>PrivateAccount*||—||— | |Halted*||NoEdit*||>closed (Private)<br>PrivateAccount*||—||— | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
* = new term/cat | * = new term/cat | ||
> = moved term/cat | > = moved term/cat | ||
Some words about ' | Some words about 'Needs love': Is it upon us to judge what has to happen? We write down what is, not what should be or will be. 'Spammed': It is spammed because those folks are not active to remove it. So, SPAM or not, the thing to detect is the level of constructive activity which leads to progress. SPAM is only the most visible aspect of lack of constructive activity. And even SPAMer stop doing their thing on a totally dormant Wiki. If we call that Wiki spammed, than SPAMer could use our Index to select SPAMable Wikis. Also 'Needs love' implies that we are thinking this Wiki should progress. But it is also not upon us to approve of Wikis, just like it is not our cup of tea to help [[User talk:Hoof Hearted/Archive4 - 2014#Wikia question|destroy]] them ;-) 'Halted' is essentially the same as Read-only because RadOnly is practically the only thing one can do to halt the Wiki I think. But maybe one can kind of halt a Wiki by closing for new Members. It looks like [[:Category:Wikimania|Wikimania]] Wikis are halted like that and then 'moved' to some kind of own archive place. Any comments? Nobody? [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 22:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
:Will have to think about some of these, have strong feelings need to sort out. One of them, | :Will have to think about some of these, have strong feelings need to sort out. One of them, Needs love is a wiki that is stumbling along, it is neither new, vibrant, or dormant. It needs people to love it. No judgement there. (It is not spammed, any wiki that is spammed, is, well, spammed.) :-) Thanks for broaching the conversation!! Best, [[MarkDilley]] | ||
::Talking about "feelings" (euphemism of interpretations/thought): I get the "feeling" that Wikipeople who needed love themselves projected this to what they where dealing with -> Wikis and therefore coined this term. There is more expectation in the term | ::Talking about "feelings" (euphemism of interpretations/thought): I get the "feeling" that Wikipeople who needed love themselves projected this to what they where dealing with -> Wikis and therefore coined this term. There is more expectation in the term Needs love than observation, whereas Spammed is an observation. Also, if taken seriously, Needs love is valid for each and every Wiki or whatever project. Therefore it is not a useful statement. It does not supply specific information about that Wiki. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 20:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
:::That's a lot of projection there, Manorainjan. I use the status " | :::That's a lot of projection there, Manorainjan. I use the status "Needs love" frequently to describe wikis which are not my own, but are struggling to maintain output. And yet, I don't feel unloved. :-) Granted, the term was already in place here when I started using it. In your schema above, you have not yet addressed wikis which do not fall into the categories "Vibrant", "Active", or "Dormant." I find "Needs love" to be a sufficient middle point between "Active" and "Dormant," the equivalent of saying "Active, but not very." On the other hand, "Dormant" implies a complete cessation of activity. We could change the name if we need to, but that seems to me a bit like arguing about window dressing. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 20:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
::::Lets stay with the point that | ::::Lets stay with the point that Needs love does not describe what is but what should be. Creating [[:Category:Needs love]] Ray described its purpose as "dusty – please adopt one if you would like". It calls for a change which is not our department. Who are we to judge about a Wiki what it needs? We are not the Wiki-welfare-agency. We do not adopt orphans, got enough to do with our project. We are the Wiki-registry. If need be to have finely graduated terms in the status category why not have SomeActivity there?[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 20:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
:::::It's a rather muted call, one which goes unheeded for the most part. That said, I would be OK with SomeActivity or Semi-Active. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 21:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC) | :::::It's a rather muted call, one which goes unheeded for the most part. That said, I would be OK with SomeActivity or Semi-Active. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 21:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
::::::OK is in table now. SemiActive could be considered as a condition which would most likely not prevail for long. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 00:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC) | ::::::OK is in table now. SemiActive could be considered as a condition which would most likely not prevail for long. [[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 00:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
|Inactive ||is dormant without much spam activity | |Inactive ||is dormant without much spam activity | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Unknown status ||YourWikiStatus | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Unknown edit mode||YourWikiEditMode | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Spammed ||is dormant with spam activity | |Spammed ||is dormant with spam activity | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Needs love ||is not what it is but what one should do // replaced by SemiActive | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Goal reached ||is Halted with a Smile :-) | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | |Goal abandoned ||is Halted with a frown :-( | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
==[[:Category:Technical problem|Technical problem]]== | ==[[:Category:Technical problem|Technical problem]]== | ||
I found two wikis with technical problems. (See [[JurisPedia (nl)|here]] ("Broken DB") and [[JurisPedia (en)|here]] ("Time out on loading").) In my opinion, there is no suitable category for them. It is neither "functional" ("[[:Category: | I found two wikis with technical problems. (See [[JurisPedia (nl)|here]] ("Broken DB") and [[JurisPedia (en)|here]] ("Time out on loading").) In my opinion, there is no suitable category for them. It is neither "functional" ("[[:Category:Needs love|Needs love]]") nor "[[:Category:Dormant|dormant]]" nor "[[:Category:Spammed|spammed]]". You could set the status to "dead", but "dead" would describe a permanent state, while technical problems are usually (hopefully) temporary... --[[Special:Contributions/5.83.136.21|5.83.136.21]] 22:22, 13 September 2018 (UTC) | ||
{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible" style="margin:0 0 0 0; padding:0px; width:100%; font-size:96%" | {|class="wikitable mw-collapsible" style="margin:0 0 0 0; padding:0px; width:100%; font-size:96%" | ||
!colspan=11|<span style=font-size:22px>[[:Category:Wiki | !colspan=11|<span style=font-size:22px>[[:Category:Wiki status|Wiki status]] [[Template:Wiki status|comparison table]]</span><br><span style=font-size:12px>''click on the individual links in the coloured left column for a fuller detail of each status [[Special:Categories|category]]''<br>(scroll down past the table to see the list of [[wiki]]s in each category, click on <nowiki>[Collapse]</nowiki> at the top right to hide this table)</span> | ||
|- | |- | ||
!width= 8% style=background:#acc|[[:Category:All|wiki]] [[:Category:Wiki | !width= 8% style=background:#acc|[[:Category:All|wiki]] [[:Category:Wiki status|status]]<br>name | ||
!width= 9% style=background:#acc|description<br>([[:Category:Wiki English|en]]) | !width= 9% style=background:#acc|description<br>([[:Category:Wiki English|en]]) | ||
!width=11% style=background:#acc|description<br>([[:Category:Wiki French|fr]]) | !width=11% style=background:#acc|description<br>([[:Category:Wiki French|fr]]) | ||
| Line 126: | Line 126: | ||
|<!--tl--> | |<!--tl--> | ||
|} | |} | ||
:This is a fantastic suggestion! Consider it [[Template: | :This is a fantastic suggestion! Consider it [[Template:Wiki status|done]] (with a slight grammar tweak). Greatly appreciate your input here on WikiIndex. :-)) Best regards, [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 13:47, 15 September 2018 (UTC) | ||
::I suggest for [[Template:Wiki]] to expand the code: | ::I suggest for [[Template:Wiki]] to expand the code: | ||
:::<tt><nowiki>|[[:Category:{{{status}}}|{{{status}}}]]<!-- Semantic property --></nowiki></tt> | :::<tt><nowiki>|[[:Category:{{{status}}}|{{{status}}}]]<!-- Semantic property --></nowiki></tt> | ||
| Line 146: | Line 146: | ||
::::(Please see there!) I am thinking about a proper way/place there to put the details of the "technical problem"... --[[Special:Contributions/5.83.136.21|5.83.136.21]] 01:24, 20 September 2018 (UTC) | ::::(Please see there!) I am thinking about a proper way/place there to put the details of the "technical problem"... --[[Special:Contributions/5.83.136.21|5.83.136.21]] 01:24, 20 September 2018 (UTC) | ||
{{ | {{Category discussions}}<!--Note: in order to assist readability of included pages, please ensure this template is kept at the BOTTOM of the displayed page--> | ||
[[Category: | [[Category:Wiki project]] | ||
edits