|
|||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This page used to host a list of dead-end pages. The list hasn't existed for some time now, so I've removed all referenced to it. Other changes I've made include:
I've kept the stuff about how to generate a list of dead-end pages using AWB, because as far as I can tell, it still ought to work. I'd appreciate it if someone else could verify that. DoctorKubla ( talk) 08:57, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
The leaders of the "Dead-end pages" project should create a userbox for participants in the project to display on their userpages. See the section "Userbox" on the page "Wikipedia:Articles written by a single editor" for an excellent example from a different project.
-- LukasMatt ( talk) 00:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
This user participates in the Dead-end pages clean up project. (You can help!) |
The entire section "Finding dead-end pages" should be deleted for these reasons:
If a valid reason exists for keeping the 11 steps around, then I think that the "Articles written by a single editor" project handles their similar procedure much more gracefully. See the section "Notes", specifically the bullet that begins "Technophiles might be interested in collaborating on the source code..." in the article
Wikipedia:Articles written by a single editor.
--
LukasMatt (
talk) 10:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
It seems there has been a reduction in the number of dead-end pages appearing here — anyone know why? Going back maybe a year or more, each time I checked the Category:All dead-end pages page, there were at least a couple, sometimes 10+. Now, on most days the category is empty, and on a 'good' (!) day there might be one or two there. Does this mean the project is better achieving its aim of getting rid of dead-end pages, or is there a problem with tagging pages as such? (Just being curious.) -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 13:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
|
|||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This page used to host a list of dead-end pages. The list hasn't existed for some time now, so I've removed all referenced to it. Other changes I've made include:
I've kept the stuff about how to generate a list of dead-end pages using AWB, because as far as I can tell, it still ought to work. I'd appreciate it if someone else could verify that. DoctorKubla ( talk) 08:57, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
The leaders of the "Dead-end pages" project should create a userbox for participants in the project to display on their userpages. See the section "Userbox" on the page "Wikipedia:Articles written by a single editor" for an excellent example from a different project.
-- LukasMatt ( talk) 00:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
This user participates in the Dead-end pages clean up project. (You can help!) |
The entire section "Finding dead-end pages" should be deleted for these reasons:
If a valid reason exists for keeping the 11 steps around, then I think that the "Articles written by a single editor" project handles their similar procedure much more gracefully. See the section "Notes", specifically the bullet that begins "Technophiles might be interested in collaborating on the source code..." in the article
Wikipedia:Articles written by a single editor.
--
LukasMatt (
talk) 10:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
It seems there has been a reduction in the number of dead-end pages appearing here — anyone know why? Going back maybe a year or more, each time I checked the Category:All dead-end pages page, there were at least a couple, sometimes 10+. Now, on most days the category is empty, and on a 'good' (!) day there might be one or two there. Does this mean the project is better achieving its aim of getting rid of dead-end pages, or is there a problem with tagging pages as such? (Just being curious.) -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 13:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)