two-letter UK domains: any use?

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

Letters to the Editor

Seeking a Wikipedian for a Summer...

Michael Peel

9 Jun 2011 9 Jun '11

11:42 a.m.

Show replies by date

David Gerard

9 Jun 9 Jun

12:03 p.m.

On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel <michael.peel(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:

...

This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be useful for Wikipedia somehow? (The deadline for applying is apparently in just under a week's time.)

Hey, why not? Nominet domains cost very little (a few quid a year). - d.

geni

12:16 p.m.

On 9 June 2011 13:03, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel <michael.peel(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:

This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be useful for Wikipedia somehow? (The deadline for applying is apparently in just under a week's time.)

Hey, why not? Nominet domains cost very little (a few quid a year).

Because it all adds up and if you actually use the names you have to keep paying for them. It's not even as if "wp" is that closely associated with Wikipedia. Online you have worldpress. Within the UK you have two police forces and that widening participation program. Said URLs are not even that short. wp.org.uk and wp.net.uk are pretty chunky. -- geni

Harry Burt

4:52 p.m.

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:16 PM, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

It's not even as if "wp" is that closely associated with Wikipedia. Online you have worldpress. Within the UK you have two police forces and that widening participation program.

Thomas Morton

5:18 p.m.

With domain names I suggest ethical use; so if we are going to use them, or it is so similar/recognisable that we don't want others using it, or there is a high liklihood of spammers using them, or it is too specific a domain (i.e. miss-spellings of Wikipedia) for it to be useful to anyone else - then get them. wp.org.uk could be useful to someone else - so lets consider whether it really is necessary. wm.org.uk seems a good idea to get. wm.co.uk I don't think is needed. Just my 2p anyway :) Tom On 9 June 2011 17:52, Harry Burt <harryaburt(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:16 PM, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

It's not even as if "wp" is that closely associated with Wikipedia. Online you have worldpress. Within the UK you have two police forces and that widening participation program.

Isn't that a good thing? Get some resale value? Maybe WMUK could retain ownership and lease them out - i.e. total control to ensure they aren't misused, maybe even a profit. Okay, that's all hypothetical, but my point was that competition isn't necessarily a bad thing. Grab a few, I say. -- Harry (User:Jarry1250) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Thomas Dalton

6:08 p.m.

On 9 June 2011 13:16, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Because it all adds up and if you actually use the names you have to keep paying for them.

Mike Peel

7:12 p.m.

With these domain names, there is an extra £10 application fee, and if the domain name is contested then it goes to auction with the highest bidder winning - so the costs of these domains could be substantially higher than usual. If there was a really pressing reason for them - e.g. if they would be well used for linking to wikipedia - then I think it would be worth getting them. Otherwise, I'm not sure we're any different from other (bigger) organisations that share the same abbreviation... Mike On 9 Jun 2011, at 19:08, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 9 June 2011 13:16, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Because it all adds up and if you actually use the names you have to keep paying for them.

It does all add up, but to a very small number. Let's say it's £5 per year per domain (which I think is about right). 6 domains for the next 10 years would cost us £300. That would mean keeping the fundraiser going for an extra hour to fund. It think it's worth that. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

George Watson

7:18 p.m.

I can see their use as a URL shortener. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or something. There's no pressing need, but it's a possibility. However, we'd probably be better off getting something more international for that (wp.org, for example). On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 20:12 +0100, Mike Peel wrote:

...

On 9 June 2011 13:16, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Because it all adds up and if you actually use the names you have to keep paying for them.

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Deryck Chan

7:22 p.m.

...

I can see their use as a URL shortener. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or something.

We already have enwp.org . I think wm.org.uk or wm.co.uk will be very useful as URL shorteners for the WMUK website. Registering some of the others (wp.org.uk etc) defensively won't hurt either, although the idea is that we back off if another legitimate organisation also want them. Deryck On 9 June 2011 20:18, George Watson <george.watson(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote:

...

I can see their use as a URL shortener. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or something. There's no pressing need, but it's a possibility. However, we'd probably be better off getting something more international for that (wp.org, for example). On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 20:12 +0100, Mike Peel wrote:

With these domain names, there is an extra £10 application fee, and if

the domain name is contested then it goes to auction with the highest bidder winning - so the costs of these domains could be substantially higher than usual.

If there was a really pressing reason for them - e.g. if they would be

well used for linking to wikipedia - then I think it would be worth getting them. Otherwise, I'm not sure we're any different from other (bigger) organisations that share the same abbreviation...

Mike On 9 Jun 2011, at 19:08, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 9 June 2011 13:16, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Because it all adds up and if you actually use the names you have to keep paying for them.

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Michael Peel

17 Jun 17 Jun

6:06 p.m.

Unfortunately, I misread the deadline on the website and thought that the deadline for applying for the domain names was the 22nd - instead, that's the deadline for paying the application fee, and the deadline for putting in an application was the 15th. I was planning on putting the application for them in this evening (which was my first opportunity this week - it's been a mad week). Apologies about that. Mike On 9 Jun 2011, at 20:22, Deryck Chan wrote:

...

I can see their use as a URL shortener. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or something. We already have enwp.org . I think wm.org.uk or wm.co.uk will be very useful as URL shorteners for the WMUK website. Registering some of the others (wp.org.uk etc) defensively won't hurt either, although the idea is that we back off if another legitimate organisation also want them. Deryck On 9 June 2011 20:18, George Watson <george.watson(a)wikinewsie.org> wrote: I can see their use as a URL shortener. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or something. There's no pressing need, but it's a possibility. However, we'd probably be better off getting something more international for that (wp.org, for example). On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 20:12 +0100, Mike Peel wrote:

On 9 June 2011 13:16, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Because it all adds up and if you actually use the names you have to keep paying for them.

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Gordon Joly

19 Jun 19 Jun

8:57 p.m.

On 17/06/2011 19:06, Michael Peel wrote:

...

whois wp.org.uk Error for "wp.org.uk". This domain cannot be registered because it contravenes the Nominet UK naming rules. The reason is: third-level domains may not comprise two alphabetic characters. WHOIS lookup made at 21:56:53 19-Jun-2011 :-) Gordo

Douglas Gardner

9 Jun 9 Jun

7:24 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/06/11 20:18, George Watson wrote:

...

I can see their use as a URL shortener. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or something.

We currently have http://enwp.org/Main_Page. Douglas

...PGP SIGNATURE...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN8R3MAAoJEIjaFbHUGSkVHbAH/i/7nJruVRxv/YEjHoJtDyRc SFUiIAagfL8L+odtvXmb7ufQ+P72viPoh+0fmG4KHPKdy7qjlqehe7DMF235foYh PrAeoApr1yIOYmGAg68pimZ4lGUMxdqDR4E87GuGxvJ9Goh6A2YA0YUeTE1ckFAR J6ErGrux0xdtvUe9lq8LtOAXdJmM46DM42jxz+NBKcE3BX/5lHt9kh1mjFNPOpm1 DOyc6JcVYVFmZYpmRNzrsKRSPQ/5Yi86bISjPrHhHlN0Ghu2rL8NUJ9Bbj6U6FRQ 8RBgTRZSLM0SkTAFQPTsCJaQ00GzOdsWMnd5IsdpwHBzEU1pd/zJu6/JQ9hYTyQ= =6Ti9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Roger Bamkin

9:21 p.m.

The importance for QR codes is very important. I was not aware that we owned enwp.org, just that we had use of it. Roger On 9 June 2011 20:24, Douglas Gardner <microchip08(a)btinternet.com> wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/06/11 20:18, George Watson wrote:

I can see their use as a URL shortener. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or something.

We currently have http://enwp.org/Main_Page. Douglas

...PGP SIGNATURE...

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

-- Roger Bamkin (aka Victuallers)

Douglas Gardner

9:22 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 For the avoidance of doubt, I don't know if it's ours or not. On 09/06/11 22:21, Roger Bamkin wrote:

...

The importance for QR codes is very important. I was not aware that we owned enwp.org, just that we had use of it. Roger On 9 June 2011 20:24, Douglas Gardner <microchip08(a)btinternet.com> wrote: On 09/06/11 20:18, George Watson wrote:

>> I can see their use as a URL shortener. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at >> times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or >> something.

We currently have http://enwp.org/Main_Page. Douglas >

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

...

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

...PGP SIGNATURE...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN8TmjAAoJEIjaFbHUGSkVq/wH/0N20R4ZD/Y1O61jTeWkHvaD q77eHzFvuyjdgBDUTmuykJ9pCRG1ug2MIDWHmQIGeQRv3FqV6Pk38+bHhdJcICwr nw7nuwzWtRrNSDHbFoBfTkKuuVGe1A8dZXcTHjvVSGg+J6U+oEvr4KsCUlhVpPG0 PacKin+ODZ7rxf/fOiAAhnk0fb/XGGoSn1i4rioUzB2A5Hpe0vQmUTXcVFOHRH/n M/4u5o5BDto13MSkU91tlo7CjvvTmsBUKKMKJ/6l1uvrEnw9Qhq+/IzHmM6DsPwb fqL2FXwhnYu3BHMc58YjnTD+9qd3vWjnPxnK78Z08qDh0b/VqemNfKIBRX8sNpU= =yRGa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Thomas Morton

9:24 p.m.

There was a thread on foundation-l not long ago; I think the person that owns it offered it to the foundation, but conversation seemed to peter out.... Tom On 9 June 2011 22:22, Douglas Gardner <microchip08(a)btinternet.com> wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 For the avoidance of doubt, I don't know if it's ours or not. On 09/06/11 22:21, Roger Bamkin wrote:

The importance for QR codes is very important. I was not aware that we

owned

enwp.org, just that we had use of it. Roger On 9 June 2011 20:24, Douglas Gardner <microchip08(a)btinternet.com>

wrote:

On 09/06/11 20:18, George Watson wrote:

We currently have http://enwp.org/Main_Page. Douglas >

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

...PGP SIGNATURE...

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Fae

10 Jun 10 Jun

10 a.m.

My understanding (based on creating QR code templates in Wikipedia and discussing this issue some months ago) is that Wikimedia does not own enwp.org. If this has changed or someone is prepared to negotiate with the owner I would like to know as this might be of immediate benefit in how QR codes can be shortened as currently best practice forces us to not use it as an official redirect method (though I use it informally as below). Thanks, Fae -- http://enwp.org/user_talk:fae Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/faetags

Brian McNeil

11:21 a.m.

On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 11:00 +0100, Fae wrote:

...

The owner of enwp.org seems to be one Thomas Kjoerberg. Incidentally, enWN also has enwn.net, and it's built right in to the wiki; look for the "Shorten URL" link down the left. This is owned by Jon Davis (ShakataGaNai), an enWN crat, and current WMF employee. -- Brian McNeil. -- brian.mcneil(a)wikinewsie.org | Wikinews Accredited Reporter. http://en.wikinews.org | http://www.wikinewsie.org "Facts don't cease to be facts, but news ceases to be news".

Thomas Dalton

9 Jun 9 Jun

12:09 p.m.

It's worth grabbing them to prevent anyone else getting them and misusing them, if nothing else. As David says, the cost is pretty minimal. I'd get wp.co.uk, wp.org.uk, wp.net.uk and the same with wm. On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel <michael.peel(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:

...

Hi all, I've just noticed that Nominet have made two-letter UK domains available for release: http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrants/aboutdomainnames/reserved/releaselist/ This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be useful for Wikipedia somehow? (The deadline for applying is apparently in just under a week's time.) Thanks, Mike _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Alex Stinson

12:13 p.m.

Definitely should be on top of wm.org.uk, you could use that for the shortened url for the Wikimedia UK page, Alex On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

...

Hi all, I've just noticed that Nominet have made two-letter UK domains available

for release:

http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrants/aboutdomainnames/reserved/releaselist/

> This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be useful for Wikipedia somehow?

> (The deadline for applying is apparently in just under a week's time.)

> Thanks, > Mike > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

Andrew Gray

12:12 p.m.

On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel <michael.peel(a)wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:

...

Yes, applying for our standard two-letter abbreviations - wm, wp, etc - seems a smart idea. Nothing ventured... -- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk

steve virgin

12:13 p.m.

Agree with Tom and David - get them -----Original Message----- From: wikimediauk-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Michael Peel Sent: 09 June 2011 12:43 To: wikimediauk-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimediauk-l] two-letter UK domains: any use? Hi all, I've just noticed that Nominet have made two-letter UK domains available for release: http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrants/aboutdomainnames/reserved/releaselist/ This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be useful for Wikipedia somehow? (The deadline for applying is apparently in just under a week's time.) Thanks, Mike _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org

4695

days inactive

4705

days old

wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

20 comments

17 participants

tags (0)

participants (17)

Alex Stinson
Andrew Gray
Brian McNeil
David Gerard
Deryck Chan
Douglas Gardner
Fae
geni
George Watson
Gordon Joly
Harry Burt
Michael Peel
Mike Peel
Roger Bamkin
steve virgin
Thomas Dalton
Thomas Morton