Talk:Main Page/Archive5
From RationalWikiWiki
Contents |
[edit] Featured articles
I'm just off out now, but here's a suggestion: how about we work on a few more articles to bring them up to featured status. I'm bored with constantly having the same people who left years ago. Rrose Selavy 14:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- I couldn't agree more. MNpunkboy 15:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- Just make sure that it wasn't MarcusCicero. He would be so proud. --Earthland 16:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'll feature his arse on my size ten work boots if that helps. Rrose Selavy 17:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- Just make sure that it wasn't MarcusCicero. He would be so proud. --Earthland 16:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
OK there's some weird way that articles transclude to the main page, but i can't work out what's happening. in the meantime, I nominate the following for featured status (please support/oppose with reasons):
[edit] Anti-religion bias
[edit] Arthropleura
[edit] RationalWiki's Community Standards
[edit] Social dynamics
[edit] P-Foster
[edit] Six months later
Nobody cares, so I'm going to do this anyway. Rrose Selavy 17:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Great, now the random featured article won't randomise. Rrose Selavy 17:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
[edit] What is this website's purpose?
(MC)
- I use this site to refer to Historical RW stuff that's hard to find there. For me it's a history of RW rather than an attack site. Others may have their own opinion. Rrose Selavy 10:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, we are both correct. The point of this site, according to the main page, is to "Identify groupthink, indentify power abuse, and observe the evolution of RationalWiki." Therefore, allowing the critics to come here and critique RationalWiki is part of our job, so long as it fits into identifying groupthink and/or power abuse. Slime attacks, however, do not fit to within that. As far as the history of the site goes, that fits well under "observing the evolution of RationalWiki." So, Rrose, we both appear to be right. MNpunkboy 08:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Keep in mind that RWW has no inherent right to reside on the RW server. It is offered as a courtesy, and I have never exerted or demanded editorial control in return for it. However, this is were to turn into a personal attack site against individuals, in a mean spirited way, RWW would have to find another home. Criticism is fine, and won't be met with me pulling the plug, but if MC comes here and is allowed to start calling people names on their articles I will issue an eviction notice. Tmtoulouse 07:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Trent is right. He is under no obligation to host it, and I certainly don't think he should if it turns vile. If RWW wants to be a meta-site that essentially records and keeps track of the fast-paced activity of the main site, then I'd certainly welcome it as something incredibly useful. As for criticism, I'd also welcome it - but then again I'm someone who's happy to learn and change, not everyone will be appreciative, especially if it's just personal attacks. Armondikov 14:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed. As I think I said above, this site's goal is to keep a historical record of RationalWiki while, at the same time, critique RationalWiki in a constructive manner. Using it as a slime attack site is, however, not within its mission. MNpunkboy 15:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Much as I agree with the above there is a side aspect. By giving the likes of Marcus, CUR and Fall Down some play space it has kept them away from RW which is a "good thing". I know this is a by product and neither is nor should be the primary purpose of this site but it is an aspect. InnocentBystander 16:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Also agree with you there, innocentbystander. I think my original point was that I'd much rather they troll RationalWiki from this site than be over at RationalWiki trying to cause HCM all over the place. At least here, they can largely be ignored, and aren't really disrupting people who are actually trying to work on something important. I do not think MarcusCicero should have free reign over here, but when he is here, at least, he is much easier to ignore and/or get rid of. MNpunkboy 18:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Much as I agree with the above there is a side aspect. By giving the likes of Marcus, CUR and Fall Down some play space it has kept them away from RW which is a "good thing". I know this is a by product and neither is nor should be the primary purpose of this site but it is an aspect. InnocentBystander 16:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed. As I think I said above, this site's goal is to keep a historical record of RationalWiki while, at the same time, critique RationalWiki in a constructive manner. Using it as a slime attack site is, however, not within its mission. MNpunkboy 15:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
[edit] I'm surprised
I've been rather out of the loop for a while now and I just thought I'd have a look at the old place. I'm pleasantly surprised. There is actual life in the site. If I had been keeping up with RW I would start to contribute again. Alas...--False Flag 20:02, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- What's more surprising is that it's all because a certain somebody showed up, and everyone kept their cool and decided to do other things that didn't involve said person. Make sense? MNpunkboy 23:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Policies box
The policies box in the lower right shouldn't be nested withing the featured article box, it looks cluttered and confusing. E.g. Kels came up as featured article for me and the policies box looks like it belongs into the "Personality profile" section of that article. -- Nx / talk 01:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Conficker's challenge
I hereby challenge this place to clear all trolling and other nonsense completely out of recent changes over the next few days. I will be gone, unfortunately, but let's see if you all can do it. Conficker 02:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- I accept your challenge sir/madam! MNpunkboy 02:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
[edit] HotCat extension
Any way one of the techies involved in this site could install the HotCat extension so that I don't need to do categories old skool? MNpunkboy 02:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- HotCat isn't an extension in itself, but a JS script, so it should be importable.
15:56, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yep, it works. Because we don't have the Gadgets extension, it needs to be done old-school, by editing your monobook.js. I have taken the liberty of doing this for you. 16:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- Cool. Thanks PH. MNpunkboy 17:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Domain name expiring
RationalWikiWiki's domain name will expire July 14th, as I have no money to continue paying for it.
It's just as well. I effectively killed this site when I commandeered it for my own purposes back in autumn of '08. (I deeply regret doing so—this site could've actually been a good thing. But now we'll never know.) It's been nothing more than a shambling zombie since then, kept alive out of hubris. It really ought to die. Hans Johnson I'll get my hans on it 05:05, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- 'Tis a shame, and just before (as my computer is broken) I was gonna spice things up here. Oh well. MNpunkboy 14:49, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it's up to you. I think the site should continue, though. I'm not sure, but it should be possible to relocate it into RW's domain, but the sheer volume of dead links could kill whatever was left. 17:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- How much does it cost to maintain the domain name, anyways? I agree with the phantom vaccuum cleaner that this place should be kept around in some form. Hell, we could even try to move it to a Wikifarm or something as a severe alternative. MNpunkboy 17:36, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Nah, let it die. Good riddance. 193.200.150.152 19:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Again, I feel it ought to die. Hans Johnson I'll get my hans on it 20:05, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- It's only $15, but what little money I have I'm saving up for something else. Hans Johnson I'll get my hans on it 20:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Nah, let it die. Good riddance. 193.200.150.152 19:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- How much does it cost to maintain the domain name, anyways? I agree with the phantom vaccuum cleaner that this place should be kept around in some form. Hell, we could even try to move it to a Wikifarm or something as a severe alternative. MNpunkboy 17:36, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well, it's up to you. I think the site should continue, though. I'm not sure, but it should be possible to relocate it into RW's domain, but the sheer volume of dead links could kill whatever was left.
Update: Ownership of the domain name is being/has been transferred to Trent. Hans Johnson I'll get my hans on it 04:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- And here (now that I'm at a computer again) I could've paid that $15. Oh well, probably better Trent have it anyways. I'll just donate that $15 to him. MNpunkboy 20:14, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
[edit] RWW readers, please check in
For those who read RWW (what, like 10 of you maybe?), I am looking for ideas as to who people think needs an article here. Granted, we have the outdated "wanted pages," but I am sure that folks can come up with more than that for me to write about. This isn't a popularity contest, I'm just at a writer's block point, and need some ideas. Conficker 05:36, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
[edit] RWW domains
Users of RWW should be aware that I am including the transfer of ownership of the rww domain to the foundation as well. 68.35.148.225 01:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- A question: when the time comes that I am able to afford it again (or if someone else wishes to do so), will I/they be able to "buy" it back from the Foundation? Hans Johnson I'll get my hans on it 02:41, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. Especially since I am an interested buyer in the future. MNpunkboy 03:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- There is no intrinsic reason that would prevent this, and I don't see a reason the trustees wouldn't agree to such an arrangement. But there is also not really much hurry either. 68.35.148.225 04:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- No, no hurry. Just curiosity as something that could happen in the future. Thanks for the feedback. MNpunkboy 05:32, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- There is no intrinsic reason that would prevent this, and I don't see a reason the trustees wouldn't agree to such an arrangement. But there is also not really much hurry either. 68.35.148.225 04:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Indeed. Especially since I am an interested buyer in the future. MNpunkboy 03:10, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Essay
I want to write something that I "own" - an essay really. I don't think that we've ever allowed this before, but would anyone have any objections? --False Flag 18:48, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hey, go ahead! I'm all for it. --Admin 19:54, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- All low-use Wikis considered, I have no objections. Go ahead! Punky McPunkersen 21:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- I assume there's no essayspace, so it would have to stay in the mainspace. Liveware Problem 03:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, you can always stick "Essay:" in the title, and that's good enough for the odd essay. 15:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, you can always stick "Essay:" in the title, and that's good enough for the odd essay.
- I assume there's no essayspace, so it would have to stay in the mainspace. Liveware Problem 03:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- All low-use Wikis considered, I have no objections. Go ahead! Punky McPunkersen 21:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Future of RWW
RWW is really low priority to transfer over when the server moves. May I suggest people interested in RWW start thinking about ways to gain some independence? The usage is small enough that cheap shared hosting would probably work fine. I won't pull the plug on it but the chances of it making it to the new server anytime soon are limited which means it won't have the defacto technical support that it had because it was piggy backing directly on the RW servers. Tmtoulouse 05:01, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- I've been pondering on this for a while, ever since Human told me via phone chat that the RW foundation was considering dropping RWW as a proxy of RW. My question for folks watching this place is: would moving this to a Wiki farm, like Referata, be a good idea, and what would doing such a move require as far as content transfer and such? Punky McPunkersen 05:25, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Also, and most importantly, what is our timetable to figure things out? Punky McPunkersen 05:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- I doubt porting to a farm would be a realistic option, with all of the customizing and extensions RA has done. We could do it, of course, but it would fundamentally change the way the wiki works.
- If we were to do it that way, I think wikia would be the best option. Liveware Problem 05:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Fuck no, wikia is horrible, stupid ads, crap fixed width skin. As for what we'd lose: wigo. 89.132.239.149 07:04, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- So what, then, are our options as a Wiki? Or should we just vanish? Punky McPunkersen 07:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- There is no specific time table or plan to drop RWW, though it has been discussed by the current board. The thing to be aware of is that there is also no immediate plan to move RWW from the box in my apartment to the new server. That can happen eventually but its low priority relative to other things. RWW will continue to exist on the box here but since RW itself isn't on the box technical support maybe more sporadic than it has been and it is subject to issues like prolonged down time if something goes wrong and I am out of town.
- My recommendation would be to find a cheaped shared hosting service that gives marginal shell access. You can find it all over the place, something like blue host just off the top of my head. The requirements to support RWW are fairly limited so <$10 a month hosting likely could support the wiki fine. Tmtoulouse 07:16, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- What would the technical requirements be for transferring content from the current server over to another server be? For instance, how would data get transferred, etc.? Punky McPunkersen 08:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- If someone is actually interested in finding an independent home for RWW I am willing to aid in getting things setup, just let me know. As I said there still no immediate issue, just trying to make sure people that are interested in this wiki are fully informed of the situation and options. Tmtoulouse 16:48, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- I've been floating the idea for a while now about asking the RW Foundation for the rights to eventually move this Wiki to a different hosting domain which I could then pay for. However, the earliest that could happen is January after I move. Plus, I also have little technical expertise and experience regarding the behind-the-scenes parts of the Wiki, so that would also be a drawback. Punky McPunkersen 00:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- The question is, are you interested in learning the behind-the-scenes parts? Nothing better than trial by fire, and I can help. Tmtoulouse 03:16, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Absolutely I am. Again, though, it would be better discussed after January, when i know more what my situation will look like. Punky McPunkersen 14:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- I can help out with the technical stuff too, and I think Phantom Hoover would be interested as well. -- Nx / talk 16:28, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's fine, as I said there is no plans to pull the plug on RWW, the board has mostly talked about encouraging the site to seek out independence. I think it is good for RWW as well to be independent of direct support from the RWF. The only caveat is as I said RWW is probably going to stay on the box in my apartment for a while yet. That is not bad, but does mean that the risk that RW and RWW both share now of prolonged downtime in my physical absence from the server will still exist even after the transition of RW itself. Tmtoulouse 18:45, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- I understand Trent. It's just that I know Human has mentioned to me before that the RW Foundation was looking to make RWW independent of RW, which piqued my interest a little in taking over the technical aspects of RWW (domain name, server-side stuff, etc.). But, again, there is time for discussion of that, and I am still uncertain if or when I would be able to take care of that, should it happen. Punky McPunkersen 23:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Out of idle curiosity, how big is RWW? Tyrannis 01:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
- I understand Trent. It's just that I know Human has mentioned to me before that the RW Foundation was looking to make RWW independent of RW, which piqued my interest a little in taking over the technical aspects of RWW (domain name, server-side stuff, etc.). But, again, there is time for discussion of that, and I am still uncertain if or when I would be able to take care of that, should it happen. Punky McPunkersen 23:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Absolutely I am. Again, though, it would be better discussed after January, when i know more what my situation will look like. Punky McPunkersen 14:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- The question is, are you interested in learning the behind-the-scenes parts? Nothing better than trial by fire, and I can help. Tmtoulouse 03:16, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- I've been floating the idea for a while now about asking the RW Foundation for the rights to eventually move this Wiki to a different hosting domain which I could then pay for. However, the earliest that could happen is January after I move. Plus, I also have little technical expertise and experience regarding the behind-the-scenes parts of the Wiki, so that would also be a drawback. Punky McPunkersen 00:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- If someone is actually interested in finding an independent home for RWW I am willing to aid in getting things setup, just let me know. As I said there still no immediate issue, just trying to make sure people that are interested in this wiki are fully informed of the situation and options. Tmtoulouse 16:48, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- What would the technical requirements be for transferring content from the current server over to another server be? For instance, how would data get transferred, etc.? Punky McPunkersen 08:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- So what, then, are our options as a Wiki? Or should we just vanish? Punky McPunkersen 07:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Fuck no, wikia is horrible, stupid ads, crap fixed width skin. As for what we'd lose: wigo. 89.132.239.149 07:04, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Also, and most importantly, what is our timetable to figure things out? Punky McPunkersen 05:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Annual awards
Annual, specific awards a la RW's CP Day awards? Perhaps:
| Category | Description | Name |
|---|---|---|
| Controversiality | A person who consistently baits HCM and often succeeds in plunging the wiki into it due to their controversial views or statements | Terry Koeckritz Award for Controversiality |
| Trolling | Either our favorite "pet" | "They Have a Cave Troll" Award for Highly Effective Trolling |
| Intoxication | A person who constantly edits while intoxicated. | Ace McWicked Award for Editing While Intoxicated |
| Editing rate | A person who always is near (or at) the top of the RW:AU chart, who usually edits across wide swaths of the day... | Huw Powell Award for Dedication to the Wiki |
| Techy | A person who is very knowledgeable in technology, helps out others, etc. | "Hacked It Together With Perl" Award for Being the Top Resident Techy |
| Conservatism | A person who has best championed conservative causes, might be hard to find on RW... | "Fair and Balanced" Award for Championing Conservatism |
| Liberalism | A person who was best championed liberal causes. | Bleeding Heart Award for Championing Liberalism |
| Anger | A person who just seems angry all the time | Tea Party Award for Constant, Incessant Anger |
| Rationality | A person who is always rational, perhaps mediating heated disputes, etc | Wise Old Goat Award for Rationality |
| Potential | A person who may not be so experienced, but shows a great deal of potential | "Young Guns" Award for Potential on the Wiki |
| Site criticism | A person who is usually hotheaded or irrational, NOT people who are passionate about something | "For a Site That Calls Itself RationalWiki" Award for Criticism of RationalWiki |
| LANCB-Best parting shot | Self-explanatory | |
| LANCB-Least missed | Self-explanatory | The "Don't Let the Door Hit You on the Way Out" award. |
| LANCB-Most missed | Self-explanatory | Firefly Award for Leaving Much Too Soon |
| Authoritarianism | A person who is generally held to be authoritarian... |
Havent' thought of names for a few, and names definitely could change.
Anyone? More? Liveware Problem 02:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Seems like a good idea. I don't think we could get pictures for them though, but has merit. Tyrannis 12:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- How about this for the irrationality award: The "Why do they call it RationalWiki?" award for Irrationality? Or maybe not. Also, we need a LANCB award! -- Nx / talk 17:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- I'd like to see a "Why do they call it RationalWiki award for most ridiculous criticism of the site". But that's just me. Armondikov 18:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Not a bad idea either, probably better than mine. Also added a name for the LANCB-Least missed award. Also also, there should be a LANCB award for this. -- Nx / talk 06:21, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- An award for most ridiculous criticism would be problematic though, since the candidates would probably be one-off trolls who have been long forgotten and no-one cares about. Anyway, alternative name for irrationality award: Headless Chicken award? -- Nx / talk 06:27, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Authoritarianism! Ooh, and maybe arrogance (Lucifer award for hubris?) I need to add to my collection. Oh, and I never got my award box from last years, so I'm still pretty pissed about that. Theemperor 03:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- An award for most ridiculous criticism would be problematic though, since the candidates would probably be one-off trolls who have been long forgotten and no-one cares about. Anyway, alternative name for irrationality award: Headless Chicken award? -- Nx / talk 06:27, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Not a bad idea either, probably better than mine. Also added a name for the LANCB-Least missed award. Also also, there should be a LANCB award for this. -- Nx / talk 06:21, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- I'd like to see a "Why do they call it RationalWiki award for most ridiculous criticism of the site". But that's just me. Armondikov 18:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- How about this for the irrationality award: The "Why do they call it RationalWiki?" award for Irrationality? Or maybe not. Also, we need a LANCB award! -- Nx / talk 17:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Head on over
- I have opened voting here, but we need MOAR NOMINATIONS! Liveware Problem 05:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Server
I have purchased the server RWW is on from the Foundation and have other plans for it than a web server. A smaller VPS was setup shortly after the one RW is on designed to move the bots over to. It will also make a perfectly capable home for RWW till you guys sort out your issues. I will likely be moving you to the new server in the next few days. I am not planning software upgrades at this time. Tmtoulouse 01:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, keep us informed, how big is this site, size wise? I might be getting a server around may and would like to know should the unthinkable happen. Tyrannis 01:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Not very big really, on the order of megabytes as opposed to RWs gigabytes. Tmtoulouse 02:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- So, if worst comes to worst, i could run it off my old gaming PC, It has a decent CPU, 3Gins RAM and 400GB hard drive space. Only problem would be connection. Tyrannis 02:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Not very big really, on the order of megabytes as opposed to RWs gigabytes. Tmtoulouse 02:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
[edit] New Server
This is the new server, still working out issues. Tmtoulouse 06:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Because of various issues the software upgrade was forced. Hopefully things are working. Tmtoulouse 07:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- The poll extension isn't working, but that's all I can see. Liveware Problem 18:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Can you point me to a page its being used on? 130.113.218.226 22:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Who is rationalwiki's biggest troll. Tyrannis 23:28, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Fixed. Tmtoulouse 23:37, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Who is rationalwiki's biggest troll. Tyrannis 23:28, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Can you point me to a page its being used on? 130.113.218.226 22:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- The poll extension isn't working, but that's all I can see. Liveware Problem 18:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
