Meta talk:MetaProject to overhaul Meta
Please remember to:
For older conversations you can see the archive index.
New namespaces & archives
Previous discussions: Meta:Babel/Archives/2008-03#Meta_namespaces
I can see archived pages that aren't relevant to the name they are occupying in the current iteration of Meta moving to a subpage of the Meta:Archive. This is an issue on en:wp as well where ther aer interesting historical pages that get regularly deleted b/c people no longer like them or want them to be active.
For old pages on a topic that may be revisited in the future, properly named according to our current Meta:style guide, they could be part of the Archive category but remain in the main namespace -- when a new impementation of the idea came around the page would be revived, would retain its history of old ideas and discussion, &c.
A separate translation namespace makes sense for a few reasons; pages-for-translation dominate all other pages on the wiki in number, making stats and searching more difficult.
For Maintenance pages, as on other wikis, I would make these part of the Meta: project namespace... not sure why we should treat them differently here. -- sj | help translate |+ 00:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- Meta:Archive doesn't exist yet, but Meta:Historical already does. About maintenance page such as SRP or SRCU, they are in the main namespace because they have a cross-wiki purpose, whereas Meta:Changing username is specific to meta-wiki. That's why it was suggested to have a specific namespace for cross-wiki, non-meta-specific maintenance such as the spam blacklist or requests to stewards.
Maintenance:may not be the best choice, perhaps
Crosswiki:would be better, I prefer
Maintenance:though. guillom 08:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Where this went off-course
For me, this project page went off course in the lede paragraph at exactly this point: "Join us on IRC at #wikimedia on freenode." I can't think of a worse place to formally reconfigure or overhaul a WMF site. -- Thekohser 15:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)