DailyBuzz/Archive1
[[DailyBuzz|talk 13:33, 6 September 2006 (PDT)
- Although, I think a policy on this should be created, maybe AboutUs:Vandalism Policy and so editors, sysops, and the owners here have clearly stated what this is and how people should react to this and what actions should be taken. Mark? --Simon | talk 13:36, 6 September 2006 (PDT)
Is this policy written anywhere? How do we know if it's the owner or someone else? Does this "acceptable blanking" policy apply to contact information, logos and text from the site only or also to alexa links? TedErnst 12:16, 7 September 2006 (PDT)
- We're working on a way for owners to authenticate that they are the real owner and then have an easy way to either OptOut or just OptOut of address/contact or OptIn to an owner contributed area. We're working out the details, but I think that'll address this issue and in the meantime, I think we just use our best judgement. Does that make sense? --User:Ray King | talk 00:53, 8 September 2006 (PDT)
- Ray, will the OptOut also include the alexa and whois links or are those un-optout-able? TedErnst 08:28, 8 September 2006 (PDT)
- I hadn't given that much thought, what do you think? --User:Ray King | talk 12:19, 8 September 2006 (PDT)
- I'm not on the hook for complaints, so it's not very fair of me to comment. If it was up to me, there would be no blanking at all, unless the ownership status was verified. Of course I'm not pushing that point of view, especially for contact information, but I can't see how links to alexa or whois could possibly violate anyone's privacy. Your call. TedErnst 12:30, 8 September 2006 (PDT)
- I think that at least in the growing stages, we want the website owners to have some control over there AboutUs.org website article. If the community makes a decision a while down the road of something different that would be then. This logic my break down when we are talking about categories, but we haven't had to think about that issue yet. My two cents, MarkDilley
- This also includes my thoughts that if an IP address blanks out one or a few sites, that we assume it is the owner of the site(s). We can always add sites back if some vandalism in that area slips by us. Again, I think in the initial stages we need to be as responsive to domain owners as possible and hope they find the value of this place eventually. My two cents, MarkDilley
- Besides, as we're adding something like 300+ pages AN HOUR, I think that one or two "lost" a day isn't so bad. The concern is that if a site owner blanks it out and then we restore it, and they come back, they're going to be pissed. Which has happened on a couple of occasions. If it's blanked out by someone else, and the site owner happens to wander in, s/he can always restore the page. Frankly, I can't believe that a single act of blanking out a page is vandalism. Vandals want to leave their mark and get away with it, which blanking a page doesn't accomplish as well as changing text in perverted little ways. --TakKendrick 12:54, 9 September 2006 (PDT)
- This also includes my thoughts that if an IP address blanks out one or a few sites, that we assume it is the owner of the site(s). We can always add sites back if some vandalism in that area slips by us. Again, I think in the initial stages we need to be as responsive to domain owners as possible and hope they find the value of this place eventually. My two cents, MarkDilley
(coughing up a little crow now) I might have to retract that last statement. Take a look at the histories for QuestionPro.com and 1902Software.com. Both ones were blanked out today (there might be more, there's still a lot Recent Changes to go through). What struck me about these is that the first revision looked a lot like vandalism (random characters in one, "f...off" on another), and then the same IP deleted the page. So, I reverted. I'm thinking that on our discretion, we might want to put a note up when we revert a blanked out revision. Some sort of template that says, "This page was restored after having been blanked out due to apparent vandalism. If the owner of this site wishes this to be removed from AboutUs.org, please follow the proper opt out instructions." --TakKendrick 23:37, 12 September 2006 (PDT)
- Decided to go ahead and set up that template: {{blanked page}}. I'd still advocate for liberal use of this template -- letting most instances of "blanking" stand -- but in cases where it certainly looks a lot like vandalism, it'd be nice to have this in our arsenal. --TakKendrick 23:46, 12 September 2006 (PDT)
Contents
Feature Notice
I think the feature notice should go on the talk page for the site and not on the actual page. Thoughts? --Simon | talk 14:19, 6 September 2006 (PDT)
- Thanks for the note Simon. We're still figuring this out. The general idea is that the feature notice should be on the actual page, kind of like a badge of honor. Plus it's simply not what the discussion/talk page was designed for (although at this point, the discussion/talk page is generally being used for reviews, which also wasn't what it was designed for). I've been putting the notice on the bottom of the page, because I want it to be on the page, but not overshadowing the whole page; other people have suggested it should go on top to "shine". There's also a thought that it should be just the "badge" and that the text from the "Featured Site" blurb be somehow worked into the actual page. It's still a work in progress. Frankly, I think it's mostly working, but it could be better, and I'd love any suggestions from you or anyone else on how to improve it. --TakKendrick 01:56, 7 September 2006 (PDT)
- Now there's an idea, I like a whole lot better, having some sort of image or even a note, and say more information on the talk page. --Simon | talk 17:41, 7 September 2006 (PDT)
- I want to create a Category:Featured Site that would list each write up for inclusion into the weblog AboutUsWeblog.org and the article page name would be like Featured Site:ChessManiac.com and so on. The could be catogorized several ways, also I am thinking about a Template:Featured Site:ChessManiac.com also. MarkDilley
Yahoo.com Groups category
I have removed belong to this category from 2 of 25 entries. They have nothing to do with yahoo groups.
The other entries also do not have anything to do with yahoo groups, except one content sniffer software application, which is designed for yahoo groups.
I understand this category meant to be for yahoo groups, means for the groups themselves.
There are 1000's of groups, however, not all of them are active. It looks a good idea to list them here.
Before doing more de-categorizing, i am asking here what to do.
- Yahoo.com groups are web-site alike, they have URL address, storage space, option to use html files directly (including javascript), memberlist, they have email address (can be switch to be public).
Please do what you think would be constructive. Short chunks or let folks know what you are doing, re: Internal Linking Guide would be good. MarkDilley, leave messages here
- My signature (creation of this section). Just discovered this new service. User:Yy-bo | talk
Semi-Protect
I went and created a little template called {{Template:sprotected}} that you can put on pages that you semi-protect so that people visiting them know why they can't edit this page. Semi-protection has become useful to get rid of a few spammers lately, so we aren't banning 4 million IP addresses.
moving article to differently titled page
Hi, I'm familiar with Wikipedia's "move" tab used to change the name of the page (redirect to new page) on which an article appears. How am I able to accomplish this on AboutUs Wiki? Thank you for any suggestion. Dave Template:unsigned
- It should be in the same place as you would see it on Wikipedia. --Simon | talk 14:18, 31 October 2006 (PST)
Hi Dave and Simon, occasionally the feature is unavailable, in those cases please tag the page with the tag on FixName. Best, MarkDilley, leave messages here
Add Missing Domain link.....is missing
I don't know if it has to do with my preferences, but the 'add missing domain' is missing from the box on my left hand side. Need help.
- Yes, you are right, we made the search feature a 3 in 1 button. Search via the MediaWiki software, search via Google and if there is no domain, create. You are not the first to ask, we did it without fanfare and I think the button should resd Search/Create, what do you think? MarkDilley, leave messages here
Granular feeds
can i add a digg or rss feed to the info on Try2bet.com ?
HI V. Laursen - I know that individual page rss feeds are on our development priorities list, not sure what you mean by being able to "Digg" it, what is needed with that?
I mean, if i had a digg at the bottom of the page, then someone on aboutus could digg the info about our site as newsworthy for exmaple.
Oh, I understand. I will ask.
Recent visitors
Moving the Template:Recent vistors to RecentVisitors and building the idea there.
