| | ::::::: @CodeCat: The moving-GP-first thing worked perfectly. All of the pages are now on my watchlist. Thanks. :-) Re: talk-page: it may be best to just ''not'' move the talk-page. Note that talk-pages don't appear separately on watch-lists; to watch a given page is necessarily to watch its talk-page, and vice versa. Re: "archive" naming scheme: I actually think we should continue the scheme whereby archived pages are named accordingly. As long as June is on WT:GP, it's fair game to contribute to those discussions, but once we remove it from WT:GP, it should be considered "archived", and the only way to add to those discussions should be to move them to the current month. But the archiving will be much smoother: we just rename [[Wiktionary:Grease pit/2012/June]] to [[Wiktionary:Grease pit archive/2012/June]] — keeping the redirect — and add some boilerplate text on the top. All existing links to June discussions will still work fine, thanks to the redirect. —[[User: Ruakh |Ruakh]]<sub ><small ><i >[[User talk: Ruakh |TALK]]</i ></small ></sub > 21:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | | ::::::: @CodeCat: The moving-GP-first thing worked perfectly. All of the pages are now on my watchlist. Thanks. :-) Re: talk-page: it may be best to just ''not'' move the talk-page. Note that talk-pages don't appear separately on watch-lists; to watch a given page is necessarily to watch its talk-page, and vice versa. Re: "archive" naming scheme: I actually think we should continue the scheme whereby archived pages are named accordingly. As long as June is on WT:GP, it's fair game to contribute to those discussions, but once we remove it from WT:GP, it should be considered "archived", and the only way to add to those discussions should be to move them to the current month. But the archiving will be much smoother: we just rename [[Wiktionary:Grease pit/2012/June]] to [[Wiktionary:Grease pit archive/2012/June]] — keeping the redirect — and add some boilerplate text on the top. All existing links to June discussions will still work fine, thanks to the redirect. —[[User: Ruakh |Ruakh]]<sub ><small ><i >[[User talk: Ruakh |TALK]]</i ></small ></sub > 21:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
| | :::::::: The big advantage of the new approach though is that there is no need for archiving at all. In particular, we could allow old discussions to be continued or just leave them where they are. Is there an important reason why old discussions should be moved to a separate page, as opposed to kept as-is? If we really need a criterium to judge when a discussion is 'old', we can just go by what you said: a discussion is old if it no longer appears on the GP main page. {{User:CodeCat/signature}} 21:58, 2 August 2012 (UTC) | | :::::::: The big advantage of the new approach though is that there is no need for archiving at all. In particular, we could allow old discussions to be continued or just leave them where they are. Is there an important reason why old discussions should be moved to a separate page, as opposed to kept as-is? If we really need a criterium to judge when a discussion is 'old', we can just go by what you said: a discussion is old if it no longer appears on the GP main page. {{User:CodeCat/signature}} 21:58, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
