It turns out I forgot all about this list. See below for discusison
of the future of cambridge.openguides.org.
----- 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 banner saying that they're no longer being updated might be the best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:
I've just set Cambridge up to use that too.
OpenGuides-Dev mailing list - OpenGuides-Dev(a)lists.openguides.org
----- End forwarded message -----