OpenGuides-Cambridge December 2016

openguides-cambridge@lists.openguides.org

2 participants
1 discussions

[dom@earth.li: Re: [OGDev] A batch of abandoned Open Guides]
by Dominic Hargreaves 08 Dec '16

08 Dec '16

It turns out I forgot all about this list. See below for discusison of the future of cambridge.openguides.org. Cheers, Dominic. ----- Forwarded message from Dominic Hargreaves <dom(a)earth.li> ----- Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 21:47:02 +0000 From: Dominic Hargreaves <dom(a)earth.li> To: OpenGuides software developers' list <openguides-dev(a)lists.openguides.org> Subject: Re: [OGDev] A batch of abandoned Open Guides On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 10:41:38AM +0000, Kake wrote: > On Tue 06 Dec 2016, Dominic Hargreaves <dom(a)earth.li> wrote: > > As I'm in the process of moving the config for the server in question, > > I'm looking at whether to migrate the following sites: > > > > http://copenhagen.openguides.org/ > > http://isle-of-wight.openguides.org/ > > http://north-devon.openguides.org/wiki/ > > http://portsmouth.openguides.org/ > > http://swindon.openguides.org/ > > > > These are all sites which seem to have very little genuine content, > > and (where edits are enabled) are sadly swamped by spam. > > Thanks for bringing this up. I wasn't aware some of those sites even > still existed! As a local historian, I would argue that keeping some > of these online but with the spam removed, edits disabled, and a clear > banner saying that they're no longer being updated might be the best > way to deal with the issue. For example, this page: > http://north-devon.openguides.org/wiki/?Terrace_Tapas_Bar might seem > useless, but actually I've made use of similar comments in my own > local history articles. > > Conversely, the Isle of Wight guide does seem not to have any real > content, so I see no reason to keep it. > > It's up to you, though, since you're the one who would have to do the > work of migration. Another option could be to clean up the spam and > then make sure everything's in the Internet Archive before deleting > the sites, though this makes it harder for a websearch to reveal the info. If there was any significant volume of content, or someone interested in keeping it running, I can put the effort in, but otherwise, I'm not sure I have the spare energy. (The owner of North Devon for example emailed me privately to say it should go). > > This site: > > > > http://cambridge.openguides.org/ > > > > has quite a lot of spam but also a reasonable amount of > > genuine content, even if not very up-to-date. > > I pretty much gave up on spamtrapping on the Cambridge guide because > it was non-trivial to update the spamcatcher module. Oxford seems to > be doing OK, though - is that all manual or is someone keeping the > spamcatcher module up to date? If the latter, could the two guides > share a spamcatcher module? Oxford uses an Akismet plugin: http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/tmp/Akismet.pm.txt I've just set Cambridge up to use that too. Dominic. -- OpenGuides-Dev mailing list - OpenGuides-Dev(a)lists.openguides.org http://lists.openguides.org/mailman/listinfo/openguides-dev ----- End forwarded message -----

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

OpenGuides-Cambridge December 2016