The Wikipediocracy dead pool

[Strelnikov]

Because it seems that WO is going nowhere, how much longer do you think the site will last, and will it remain online as a locked museum or just be yanked?

[Stanistani]

Because it seems that WO is going nowhere, how much longer do you think the site will last, and will it remain online as a locked museum or just be yanked?

Forums are losing mindshare in general. People want to participate on the more 'social, sharing' megasites.

I do plan to add an SSL certificate to the site and change the CSS to be more mobile-friendly in the next 90 days or so.

If it goes completely dead I'll do my best to keep it online as an archive.

[Mutineer]

Because it seems that WO is going nowhere, how much longer do you think the site will last, and will it remain online as a locked museum or just be yanked?

Forums are losing mindshare in general. People want to participate on the more 'social, sharing' megasites.

Garbage excuse for WO's sorry decline and failure. If competition from Facebook and Twitter and so on were the reason, how come our former board at Proboards was gathering velocity and members and activity? You kicked out writers and people with something to say, brought on board Wikipedia administrators that needle others about grammar and similar. WO's management group resembled Arbcom in its aloof, black-box, non-transparent, abusive, and stupid approach. Etc., etc., but the main thing is you abandoned your purported mission ("shine a light in the dark crevasses" sounds like farce now) and became a Wikipedia fan and support board.

[ericbarbour]

Etc., etc., but the main thing is you abandoned your purported mission ("shine a light in the dark crevasses" sounds like farce now) and became a Wikipedia fan and support board.

To be a little more equitable, this seems to be a constant problem with all Wikipedia "criticism"--so much of it is by Wikipedian secret fans who just wanna get back in there and edit again. (Or get paid to edit it without going thru agony to hide their tracks.) But then I've already made my point on the blog. (I tried to be "amusing", and all I got in return was abuse. So be it.)

As for when WO will go under? It costs very little to keep a website online if it draws very little traffic; someone just has to maintain it and delete spamming. I would have bet that the original Wikipedia Review would be offline by now; it's been FIVE YEARS since Selina went off the cliff. But it's still there and most of the older threads are still untouched. Sadly the 2011-2012 threads where she and others fought over nonsense were deleted or hacked up, and the blog is gone. Worse yet: no one seems to miss any of it. That's the likely fate of WO eventually. It's pretty close to the same level of disinterest.

Whatever the rest of you might think, Wikipedia criticism is important; I'm very glad that I posted most of my hard information about Wikipedia's history on Ed Buckner's private wiki, and made copies of it. It's safe even though (because?) it's not publicly accessible. Plus there are PDF distillations available, so if anyone wants to write a serious tome about the failure of Wikipedia and things related, you are welcome to check with me.

[ericbarbour]

Sure enough, as someone noted elsewhere, Hex has disappeared from WO. Last post was in January, he's now listed as "Retired".

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/search. ... 1&sr=posts

[Flip Flopped]

Sure enough, as someone noted elsewhere, Hex has disappeared from WO. Last post was in January, he's now listed as "Retired".

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/search. ... 1&sr=posts

I think they are mod-less except that Hersch was still green last time I looked. That may have changed now.

[ericbarbour]

Looks as if they are down to 2-5 posts per day. That's the Death Zone (not that they will take any action to reverse it).

Who in the hell would participate on a forum where 90% of the posts are by Greg Kohs, Poetlister and the sysop?? Because that's what I see right now.

[Strelnikov]

Looks as if they are down to 2-5 posts per day. That's the Death Zone (not that they will take any action to reverse it).

Who in the hell would participate on a forum where 90% of the posts are by Greg Kohs, Poetlister and the sysop?? Because that's what I see right now.

Masochists?

[ericbarbour]

Rogol is still appearing and they managed to brown-nose the Vig into returning. But it's still not a healthy forum.

(You could say the same about this one, and all the others--as I've said before, the whole generic concept of "Wikipedia criticism" is at a standstill. And people refuse to admit it, just as Jimbo refuses to admit he was an awful "movement leader" and "sole flounder" or whatever. WP:SLAP and all that applies to the entire internet. A concept which originated on IRC and Usenet. The Web's culture was more-or-less fixed in a certain form 20 years ago. Of course.)

[ericbarbour]

After months of inactivity, Somey has gone back to posting the usual lame jokes to
https://twitter.com/FakeJimb0Wales
and not on WO. Conclusion: even the former sysop of Wikipedia Review is getting tired of WO.