Battlestar Wiki talk:Official Communiques: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:05, 6 October 2006

Cleanup time limit

Should there be a time limit on questions? Some of the questions (including mine about the episode transcipt permission contact) have pretty much just sat there. I don't want to go archiving questions willy-nilly, but after a certain amount of time with the question remaining unanswered, and especially reflecting on the fact that subsequent questions ARE answered, might we decide on a point at which we are willing to pull the plug on them? I'm just trying to keep this page under the 32KB mark, and that'll get harder to do if we have an "unanswered questions graveyard" taking up space.

Also, I left the episode name question up, as it appears to be getting periodic updates. That's awesome!--Steelviper 14:11, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

I would say that we should leave the unanswered questions up for a period of 1 week, then archive them. As for questions that have been answered, I would venture that after a week of inactivity we should archie it. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 14:24, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

Archives... for the archives?

Let me first say that this is awesome! I am thrilled at the amount that official sources (particularly Brad Thompson) have contributed. That being said, the archive headers are starting to take over the page, and they're not going to get any smaller. As we continue to accumulate questions and responses, we'll need a way to organize them so that people can find what they're looking for (without cluttering up the place). Also, just wading through the question headers is going to start to get challenging, so we may want to consider different ways of indexing the information (by topic, answered vs unanswered, reverse alphabetical by third letter of the last post, whatever). Not necessarily storing them that way (redundancy can be bad/dangerous), but providing some sort alternate index or searches. This isn't really an emergency, but just a trend that I had noticed and I wanted to see if others agreed that this may become a problem as well as solicit ideas for potential solutions. --Steelviper 08:05, 6 October 2006 (CDT)

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 Also, I left the episode name question up, as it appears to be getting periodic updates. That's awesome!--[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 14:11, 25 August 2006 (CDT)
 : I would say that we should leave the unanswered questions up for a period of 1 week, then archive them. As for questions that have been answered, I would venture that after a week of inactivity we should archie it. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 14:24, 25 August 2006 (CDT)
+== Archives... for the archives? ==
+Let me first say that this is awesome! I am thrilled at the amount that official sources (particularly Brad Thompson) have contributed. That being said, the archive headers are starting to take over the page, and they're not going to get any smaller. As we continue to accumulate questions and responses, we'll need a way to organize them so that people can find what they're looking for (without cluttering up the place). Also, just wading through the question headers is going to start to get challenging, so we may want to consider different ways of indexing the information (by topic, answered vs unanswered, reverse alphabetical by third letter of the last post, whatever). Not necessarily storing them that way (redundancy can be bad/dangerous), but providing some sort alternate index or searches. This isn't really an emergency, but just a trend that I had noticed and I wanted to see if others agreed that this may become a problem as well as solicit ideas for potential solutions. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 08:05, 6 October 2006 (CDT)