![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've removed a few paragraphs added in this edit - they seem like someone's personal views to me. Perhaps some of the points can be re-added in, but it needs a lot more thought. sjorford (talk) 11:31, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Wikipedia maintains a catgeory of websites by TLD, or a list of same? I'm keeping my eye on a few .eu articles, and thought it might make sense to toss in some kind of category. samwaltz 00:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Well there are is a large number of websites (tens of millions) and the nearest thing to a categorisation of the web is Dmoz's architecture. Even on .eu, the number of active websites is quite low. (I've forensically reconstructed most (75%+) of .eu domains and approximately 25% of the active websites point to just 15 IPs - most of them are "coming soon" parking IPs and the others are domain warehousing operations.) A lot of the web is like this so one of the biggest single categories would be "parking/coming soon" pages. In terms of active domains, based on work in did in mapping every website in com/net/org/biz/info/ie a while ago, approximately 70% of the domains in the TLDs are active (the other 30% being dead). -- Jmccormac 12:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Force of habit - I think globally. :) I'm not sure that there are that many .eu sites in Wikipedia at the moment. Most of the new .eu sites I've seen are blog type sites or Joomla minisites (such as those in .info to monetise domains). I haven't seen any large pureplay .eu websites yet and for the UK and Ireland, it is very much a backwater domain. Many of the UK registered .eu domains have been registered by front companies operated by non-EU businesses, typically in the US and Canada. The .eu count for Ireland is around 30K but I've only detected about 6K on Irish hosters. Significantly, one major domain warehousing company has used an Irish front company to register .eu domains. It might end up being a very limited category. :) -- Jmccormac 16:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
How come ".eu" is classed as a ccTLD, yet ".asia" is classed as a gTLD?
The European Union is a group of countries though, not JUST one. So that argument is out the window. How about on the main template a section for regional TLDs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.200.87.22 ( talk) 07:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
These are the preliminary results of an .eu mapping project last month I've been working on in the last month. Out of approximately 1.77M resolving domains (from 2.15M tracked) there are approximately 1.436M websites. The current stats for these websites are:
Webtype | Websites | Web % | Total % |
A | 373612 | 26.0223 | 21.0975 |
B | 82188 | 5.7244 | 4.6411 |
D | 46450 | 3.2353 | 2.6230 |
F | 96342 | 6.7103 | 5.4403 |
H | 310639 | 21.6362 | 17.5414 |
N | 3088 | 0.2151 | 0.1744 |
P | 106361 | 7.4081 | 6.0061 |
R | 275886 | 19.2156 | 15.5790 |
S | 8331 | 0.5803 | 0.4704 |
U | 4565 | 0.3180 | 0.2578 |
W | 126224 | 8.7916 | 7.1277 |
X | 2053 | 0.1430 | 0.1159 |
A: Active/not yet classified.
B: Brand protection registration.
D: refresh in webpage.
F: Forbidden or other 4nn code.
H: Holding page with no content.
N: Duplicate content network of sites.
P: PPC parked.
R: Redirected (301/302 codes).
S: Site is for sale.
U: Site unavailable 127.0.0.1 is not a valid IP etc.
W: Domain aggregation network sites.
X: Porn sites.
I still haven't finished working on the stats. The Active websites figure is continually being downgraded as I clean the index. It would not be unthinkable to see a figure closer to 10% for the number of active .eu websites. The usage of .eu is a disaster. The domain industry regards it as a joke domain run by a bunch of jerks. It could have been a domain for Europe. Now it is just a domain that epitomises the incompetence, bureaucracy and waste. -- Jmccormac 21:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Looks like somebody added a merge tag last October, but didn't follow through. The .eu.int article is tiny, about the size that would make a good 'historical context' for this one.
-- Dynamicadam ( talk) 19:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't merge. The domains are different, the historical context does not make them one or identical. -- Purodha Blissenbach ( talk) 19:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I know of at least one site that is outside the EU, but uses the .eu domain. It is a European site, but has nothing to do with Pan-Europeanism or anything, is quite local. -- Mátyás ( talk) 10:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
(Full disclosure: I'm a Doster employee) I'm concerned about the comment that there were long queues at Dotster. This seems to be unfairly singling out Dotster. Yes, there are sometimes delays. But can anyone prove that other registrars didn't long wait times too? DotsterCSR ( talk) 02:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I see that, at least of today, htt://www.ecb.eu has stopped working - but http://www.ecb.int still works. Is thi indicative of policy? cockup? conspiracy? (as usual, my money's on a cockup). -- Red King ( talk) 18:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
ecb.eu. 86400 IN NS ns1.ecb.int.
This shows that the authoritative nameserver for ecb.eu is ns1.ecb.int. It is unusual to have a single nameserver for a domain but it is a classic example of a single point of failure.
The problem is on ns1.ecb.int and this is the nameserver that is not responding for the domain. This is why there is a SERVFAIL error. If the domain was not in the .eu zone then the result from the Eurid nameservers would be NXDOMAIN for no domain (status: NXDOMAIN). Jmccormac ( talk) 01:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone reckon we should mention the 123Reg's .eu sale, selling limited .eu domains for £0.97pa. The drunken guy ( talk) 19:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
"Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 April 2002 on the implementation of the .eu Top Level Domain1 is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. "
No information regarding this is to be found at EurID tho..... http://europalov.no/files/jcd/2013/eos-2013-085.pdf
Please see DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 85/2013 http://europalov.no/files/jcd/2013/eos-2013-085.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:700:1500:D120:28EB:B546:2456:CDC8 ( talk) 11:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
It's a minor thing, I know, but does anyone know what, if any, rules are in place for UK-based domain owners following the
Brexit vote, particularly if the UK ends up outside the
EEA?
Tonywalton
Talk
01:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).
I removed a large chunk of text concerning the back and forth between GoDaddy and the Eu. Jmccormac reverted saying this was an: "important historical aspect of the .eu land rush and sunrise phase..." It's all well and good that this was "important" but importance is not our standard for inclusion, notability is. The notability of this minor conflict on the origin of the TLD a dozen years ago is minimal at best. The majority of the text is sourced to GoDaddy's then-CEO's blog. The EU press release supposedly in response is no longer available and not retrievable through Wayback. The text indicates that the EU's response "had yet to be heard" almost a decade ago, even EU processes don't move that slowly. There are no new sources apparently available on searches. This is, on balance, an example of WP:RECENTISM that has lingered here as it the dispute was fresh in 2006 when it was originally added but no lasting significance has attached. It should be drastically trimmed. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've removed a few paragraphs added in this edit - they seem like someone's personal views to me. Perhaps some of the points can be re-added in, but it needs a lot more thought. sjorford (talk) 11:31, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone know if Wikipedia maintains a catgeory of websites by TLD, or a list of same? I'm keeping my eye on a few .eu articles, and thought it might make sense to toss in some kind of category. samwaltz 00:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Well there are is a large number of websites (tens of millions) and the nearest thing to a categorisation of the web is Dmoz's architecture. Even on .eu, the number of active websites is quite low. (I've forensically reconstructed most (75%+) of .eu domains and approximately 25% of the active websites point to just 15 IPs - most of them are "coming soon" parking IPs and the others are domain warehousing operations.) A lot of the web is like this so one of the biggest single categories would be "parking/coming soon" pages. In terms of active domains, based on work in did in mapping every website in com/net/org/biz/info/ie a while ago, approximately 70% of the domains in the TLDs are active (the other 30% being dead). -- Jmccormac 12:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Force of habit - I think globally. :) I'm not sure that there are that many .eu sites in Wikipedia at the moment. Most of the new .eu sites I've seen are blog type sites or Joomla minisites (such as those in .info to monetise domains). I haven't seen any large pureplay .eu websites yet and for the UK and Ireland, it is very much a backwater domain. Many of the UK registered .eu domains have been registered by front companies operated by non-EU businesses, typically in the US and Canada. The .eu count for Ireland is around 30K but I've only detected about 6K on Irish hosters. Significantly, one major domain warehousing company has used an Irish front company to register .eu domains. It might end up being a very limited category. :) -- Jmccormac 16:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
How come ".eu" is classed as a ccTLD, yet ".asia" is classed as a gTLD?
The European Union is a group of countries though, not JUST one. So that argument is out the window. How about on the main template a section for regional TLDs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.200.87.22 ( talk) 07:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
These are the preliminary results of an .eu mapping project last month I've been working on in the last month. Out of approximately 1.77M resolving domains (from 2.15M tracked) there are approximately 1.436M websites. The current stats for these websites are:
Webtype | Websites | Web % | Total % |
A | 373612 | 26.0223 | 21.0975 |
B | 82188 | 5.7244 | 4.6411 |
D | 46450 | 3.2353 | 2.6230 |
F | 96342 | 6.7103 | 5.4403 |
H | 310639 | 21.6362 | 17.5414 |
N | 3088 | 0.2151 | 0.1744 |
P | 106361 | 7.4081 | 6.0061 |
R | 275886 | 19.2156 | 15.5790 |
S | 8331 | 0.5803 | 0.4704 |
U | 4565 | 0.3180 | 0.2578 |
W | 126224 | 8.7916 | 7.1277 |
X | 2053 | 0.1430 | 0.1159 |
A: Active/not yet classified.
B: Brand protection registration.
D: refresh in webpage.
F: Forbidden or other 4nn code.
H: Holding page with no content.
N: Duplicate content network of sites.
P: PPC parked.
R: Redirected (301/302 codes).
S: Site is for sale.
U: Site unavailable 127.0.0.1 is not a valid IP etc.
W: Domain aggregation network sites.
X: Porn sites.
I still haven't finished working on the stats. The Active websites figure is continually being downgraded as I clean the index. It would not be unthinkable to see a figure closer to 10% for the number of active .eu websites. The usage of .eu is a disaster. The domain industry regards it as a joke domain run by a bunch of jerks. It could have been a domain for Europe. Now it is just a domain that epitomises the incompetence, bureaucracy and waste. -- Jmccormac 21:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Looks like somebody added a merge tag last October, but didn't follow through. The .eu.int article is tiny, about the size that would make a good 'historical context' for this one.
-- Dynamicadam ( talk) 19:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Don't merge. The domains are different, the historical context does not make them one or identical. -- Purodha Blissenbach ( talk) 19:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I know of at least one site that is outside the EU, but uses the .eu domain. It is a European site, but has nothing to do with Pan-Europeanism or anything, is quite local. -- Mátyás ( talk) 10:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
(Full disclosure: I'm a Doster employee) I'm concerned about the comment that there were long queues at Dotster. This seems to be unfairly singling out Dotster. Yes, there are sometimes delays. But can anyone prove that other registrars didn't long wait times too? DotsterCSR ( talk) 02:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I see that, at least of today, htt://www.ecb.eu has stopped working - but http://www.ecb.int still works. Is thi indicative of policy? cockup? conspiracy? (as usual, my money's on a cockup). -- Red King ( talk) 18:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
ecb.eu. 86400 IN NS ns1.ecb.int.
This shows that the authoritative nameserver for ecb.eu is ns1.ecb.int. It is unusual to have a single nameserver for a domain but it is a classic example of a single point of failure.
The problem is on ns1.ecb.int and this is the nameserver that is not responding for the domain. This is why there is a SERVFAIL error. If the domain was not in the .eu zone then the result from the Eurid nameservers would be NXDOMAIN for no domain (status: NXDOMAIN). Jmccormac ( talk) 01:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone reckon we should mention the 123Reg's .eu sale, selling limited .eu domains for £0.97pa. The drunken guy ( talk) 19:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
"Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 April 2002 on the implementation of the .eu Top Level Domain1 is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. "
No information regarding this is to be found at EurID tho..... http://europalov.no/files/jcd/2013/eos-2013-085.pdf
Please see DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 85/2013 http://europalov.no/files/jcd/2013/eos-2013-085.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:700:1500:D120:28EB:B546:2456:CDC8 ( talk) 11:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
It's a minor thing, I know, but does anyone know what, if any, rules are in place for UK-based domain owners following the
Brexit vote, particularly if the UK ends up outside the
EEA?
Tonywalton
Talk
01:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).
I removed a large chunk of text concerning the back and forth between GoDaddy and the Eu. Jmccormac reverted saying this was an: "important historical aspect of the .eu land rush and sunrise phase..." It's all well and good that this was "important" but importance is not our standard for inclusion, notability is. The notability of this minor conflict on the origin of the TLD a dozen years ago is minimal at best. The majority of the text is sourced to GoDaddy's then-CEO's blog. The EU press release supposedly in response is no longer available and not retrievable through Wayback. The text indicates that the EU's response "had yet to be heard" almost a decade ago, even EU processes don't move that slowly. There are no new sources apparently available on searches. This is, on balance, an example of WP:RECENTISM that has lingered here as it the dispute was fresh in 2006 when it was originally added but no lasting significance has attached. It should be drastically trimmed. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)