What this page is for
This page is for discussions related specifically to the wiki front page itself. If your comment relates to the wiki in general — such as plans, policy, questions about what content is appropriate etc — please use Talk:Meta:Community Portal instead.
Thayvian 04:33, May 6, 2012 (UTC)
I didn't like the old logo for this and replaced it with the girl in robotux, I hope that's ok. I think it sends a nicer message :) Piawaugh 21:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Works for me! --Skud 02:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Uh, as far as I am aware, that logo is (a) copyright Valerie Aurora Henson and (b) only licenced by Val for use in LinuxChix circumstances, see http://www.linuxchix.org/linuxchix-logo.html I don't see that we can use it here without her express permission. And even if we did I am not sure LinuxChix would be thrilled (it's their logo after all, not a multipurpose women-geek logo), although their displeasure doesn't have legal force that I'm aware of. I'll check in with Val. Thayvian 06:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- For reference the old logo was Image:Whack.gif Thayvian 06:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've checked with Val, and she has released it CC BY-SA. So that angle is sorted. I will update the image upload. Thayvian 03:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Maybe we need some kind of Village Pump (Wikipedia equivalent) for general site discussions? Meanwhile, I'll stick a potential topic here: the old "I don't see gender"/"aren't you the sexists here, saying women want different things from men?" etc etc angle. Or is that too Feminism 101? Can we come up with a geek specific aspect to it? (FLOSSPOLS did describe the geek mindset as particularly individualistic and skeptical of claims that individuals are influenced by culture.) Thayvian 07:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- Re: a forum, yes, I think the time has come. Wikia has some facilities for setting up forums here. I'll see to it. One of the things I think we need to do in relation to that is change the "welcome" message that comes out, laying out guidelines etc. I'll see what I can come up with and let you know. Re: common myths, yeah, maybe a Myths page? I don't think it's too 101 at all, though I do think that links to the "finally, a feminism 101 blog" would be appropriate. It would be easy to give geek examples for the most common myths. --Skud 19:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- Forums: IMHO, having tried them out a bit, the forums are a PITA and I don't like them. I vote we use the Community Portal's "Talk" page for general discussions. We can archive off threads onto their own pages as they need it. --Skud 19:57, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
The discussion here (excerpt: "... the geek feminism wiki ... feels like someone is tying a rope to the past and present to make it harder to move forward.") is a 101 discussion and has been moved to User talk:22.214.171.124 Thayvian 10:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Cleaning up the Gaming Section
Question. Should I sit down and make a cleaner Gaming section? Stick a larger gaming splash page and then link to the existing other pages? Koipond 05:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean by a splash page (in this context)? Do you mean a big image somehow? Or something else? Thayvian 10:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- Just a page where you can find gaming in general and then go off into the various areas like Video Gaming, Roleplaying, etc. Koipond 09:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Moving off Wikia
To Skud: I know you have been approached about this; puzzlement told me that you're opposed, primarily due to spam protection concerns, but I think that this deserves an open discussion and we're better off leaving Wikia. My primary concerns are intrusive ads in the content area, bloat with useless "features" that actively impede usability, and the streamrolling nature of the changes Wikia makes, over the heads of the users and admins of its hosted wikis.
Soon, Wikia is going to roll out a New and Improved skin with even less content space and even more space reserved for clutter. You can see how this very page will look here. In short, it's eye-searing. Weird choices of colors, large icons in different places, useless "social" cruft that belongs to a site like Facebook more than an informative wiki, fixed width and a huge sidebar that squeezes the actual content into teeny-tiny space.
Spam protection is a concern, but it's manageable. There are different possible options. Shoutwiki is a leaner, meaner alternative to Wikia; it has some of the same drawbacks as Wikia (namely, ads and a subdomain), but at least it doesn't force a custom bloated skin and uses Monobook (still customizable with CSS). For spam protection, they have CAPTCHAs and a hidden input field. Their technical support stuff also gives me the impression of being friendlier and less uptight than Wikia's.
Another wiki farm worth looking at is Wikkii, which provides a comparable service.
Yet another option would be hosting a MediaWiki installation on geekfeminism.org. That would require us to install anti-spam tools ourselves, but it's completely doable, and there are many owners of standalone MediaWiki sites to ask for help with setting those measures up.
One drawback that I see is that the Wikia-hosted site will remain here, and will outrank the new one in search engines, at least for now. At least on geekfeminism.org, links can be updated everywhere to point to the new wiki. - Sikon 09:13, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Sophie here from the #gf IRC channel. I don't think self-hosting will have too many problems with spam - on all the wikis I've hosted, defeating spambots is as easy as making sure that it's only editable by registered users with *verified* email addresses. (Or, as MediaWiki puts it, "authenticated" email addresses.) Of course, I understand that that won't allow for unregistered editing like this comment itself, so, hmm. --126.96.36.199 12:34, October 14, 2010 (UTC)
- I already maintain (sottily) several MediaWiki installs and would rather not have yet another to keep healthy. This wiki's already in place and the ads or colors don't seem too intrusive to me. - Liz H.
- My thoughts are similar to Liz's: the trouble is commitment. We need to find someone (volunteer(s), paid hosting) that would be demonstrably willing and capable of doing the hosting, updating and support for several years to make the hassle of a move worth it. It's one thing to say "not that hard", it's another thing to say "and I will do it, and I will do it for a long time." It's not that hard but... I don't see anyone volunteering to do what work there is. Thayvian 22:13, October 14, 2010 (UTC)