| Tomtomn00's Notice: |
|---|
| Yeah, feel free to contribute to this page, leave any feedback and even contribute to the vote about this. You must state when discussing a certain thing the section name, the specified item's number in that section, and the overall number in the section. Example section: ==Abuse Filter== I am here to discuss [1], [o1]. --Tomtomn00 (talk/contribs/log) |
Combination
I have a page similar to this. I suggest we combine it. You game? - Quenty (talk • May 5)
Unnecessary
I don't see a need for any of these at the present time. Right now, we're trying to sort out the general structure of the wiki. Making the wiki public would disrupt that tremendously. --Anaminus 18:41, 5 May 2012 (EDT)
- At the moment, indeed But considering how much time it takes to get the devs to do anything about the wiki, perhaps it'd be better to start trying to get their attention right now... --JulienDethurens 18:42, 5 May 2012 (EDT)
- Devs allocate their time to things of much higher priority, which is why there is little support from their end. If we want to get devs involved, we have to show that it would be worth their time. --Anaminus 18:56, 5 May 2012 (EDT)
SpamBlacklist
The AbuseFilter extension would be extremly useful, and I have already learnt how to use is, but what about we also add the SpamBlacklist extension? We can use it with the default list, which is used by the Wikimedia projects, and that, by itself, would probably be enough to block lots of sites that don't need to be linked to. We could also add other sites to the list if we ever need to, in case someone is having fun by spamming lots of pages with links. In fact, perhaps a better solution would be to literally whitelist links instead of blacklisting them. --JulienDethurens 18:46, 5 May 2012 (EDT)
- This is a wiki. By interconnecting it to reference websites, materials stay updated. I suggest just keeping a blacklist. - Quenty (talk • May 5)