For my particular interests, I am fine with that.
But I think historians would disagree. A lot can
be learned from documented ideas that didn't come to fruition.
Paul
At 2015-10-15 11:08 am, you wrote:
Hi,Â
You are all correct on archiving old pages that
might be of research interest. We are all for
that. The pages we hope to delete are about
systems that never existed but were just talked
about, and the idea was replaced by something
else that exists now. It doesn't make sense for
us to have those pages. Anything that is about
something has been worked on, and is not active any more will be archived.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Paul J. Weiss
<<mailto:paul@paulweiss.info>paul@paulweiss.info> wrote:
I am definitely on the side of archiving rather
than deleting. Some of my research interests
involve looking at past documentation.
Retrieving outdated documentation is okay, as
long as it is clear immediately that it is
indeed outdated. We can also enable searching
from within WMF webspace to exclude outdated
documentation. There are many ways to accomplish
these goals: adding "Archived" to the title,
making a new namespace, using categories, etc.
Paul
Paul J. Weiss
PhD student, Information science
University of Washington
At 2015-10-15Â 10:48 am, you wrote:
I've
always thought that blanking the page
and replacing it with a template which says
it's historical andà linksà to the
historical version of the page would be a good
solution that balances preserving history with
deemphasizing outdated information.
This would make info show up in searches still,
which we definitely do not want. Seems that deleting is a better option.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Neil P. Quinn
<<mailto:nquinn@wikimedia.org>nquinn@wikimedia.org> wrote:
I've
always thought that blanking the page and
replacing it with a template which says it's
historical and links to the historical version
of the page would be a good solution that
balances preserving history with deemphasizing outdated information.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Dan Andreescu
<<mailto:dandreescu@wikimedia.org>dandreescu@wikimedia.org > wrote:
We have a documentation cleanup day coming up
soon, and we've just got
delete permissions so we can actually clean.
Please don't delete old content, mark it as {{historical}} or
{{outdated}} and archive it instead.
I'm all for following the norm here, but
wouldn't that mean it still shows up in
searches?ÃÂ That's what I'm trying to avoid,
minimizing the confusion.Ã
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
<mailto:Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org>Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
--
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Neil_P._Quinn-WMF>Neil
P. Quinn, product analyst
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
<mailto:Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org>Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
<mailto:Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org>Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
<mailto:Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org>Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
--
--Madhu :)
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics