[Foundation-l] Closing inactive Wikinewses

[Sean Whitton]

It seems like a sensible idea; I particularly agree that Wikinews is
unique in this manner and would look rather bad if inactive. However,
I would like to suggest that the lock occurs at three months, and
perhaps the notice (or a similar one) is applied at one, giving people
on the project a chance to get it going again - a two-stage system.

S

On 17/10/06, Ilya Haykinson <haykinson at gmail.com> wrote:
> I would place a much shorter window on the inactivity threshold --
> perhaps 1 month.
>
> I second the suggestion for the higher reactivation requirement, as
> well -- it encourages the redevelopment of a community. One must
> notice though that the reactivating users may not at all be related to
> the originating users, and yet they would have this higher burden of
> rounding up members.  I would suggest that in response we should be
> quicker at unlocking the wiki once the votes are in.
>
> -ilya haykinson
>
> On 10/16/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > I suggest the following policy:
> >
> > When a Wikinews edition has seen no new stories for 8 weeks, the wiki
> > is locked and a site notice is added: "This Wikinews edition is
> > currently inactive. If you are interested in working on it, please
> > indicate so on [[m:Wikinews/Reactivate an edition]]." (In the correct
> > language, of course.) Instead of just 5 votes, you would need 10
> > Wikimedians to sign the reactivation pledge.
> >
> > Inactive editions could also be removed from the interlanguage link
> > list on the Main Pages, but that would be optional if it's too much
> > maintenance.
> >
> > There are currently a few Wikinewses that meet this criterion. In
> > general our setup policy tends to at least determine whether there's a
> > general interest but that doesn't ensure that people keep posting.
> >
> > Without such a policy, I think we are just turning these sites into
> > magnets for vandalism and spam, as well as making Wikinews look
> > unprofessional (a news site with news that are a year old isn't much
> > of one). An open recognition that an edition is dead seems preferable
> > to me.
> >
> > Wikinews is of course very special in this regard because it doesn't
> > really matter that much if a Wikipedia edition is dead for a couple of
> > months, but for Wikinews, it is a very obvious sign that the critical
> > mass is not there.
> >
> > Does this policy proposal sound reasonable?
> >
> > --
> > Peace & Love,
> > Erik
> >
> > Member, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> >
> > DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, all views or opinions expressed
> > in this message are solely my own and do not represent an official
> > position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
	—Xyrael / Sean Whitton ~ Knowledge is power, but only wisdom is liberty
		sean at silentflame.com | xyrael.net