Talk:Main Page
From Spamwiki
Contents |
ANNOUNCEMENTS
NOTE! The wiki will be changing servers in the coming days. No disruption in the wiki is expected, but cannot be ruled out while we change our system.
--WikiForseti 10:24, 19 October 2007 (CEST)
ACCESS PROBLEM: This afternoon the wiki was temporarily unavailable. This was due to our exceeding the SQL Database quota allowed at the present web host. Everything is back to normal now. --WikiForseti 21:11, 2 July 2008 (CEST)
Other comments
File uploads enabled for administrators
If you upload images, please be sure that they are highly compressed please
Disable spam domains
When giving spam samples, etc. please convert:
http://www.spamdomain.hk
to
http:(domain deleted by SpamWiki admin)
We don't want to provide extra help in referencing their sites.
I disagree in principle - There are times when actual URLs are useful for providing evidence. I contend that they should be left in place for that purpose
Change internet to Internet (in the future - I searched the current ones RayVenn 18:32, 2 March 2007 (CET))
Special:Wantedpages - I don't have competence on these subjects. SiL promised to write about Impersonator, perhaps also KS Form Filler RayVenn 23:24, 8 March 2007 (CET)
Please add category: Registrar Advice Put the 4 new "Suspending .." pages in that category We may also need an introductory Registrar Advice page that explains the purpose of the 4 pages, and an overview of the what, when and why (since each page has the "how" covered) --MarkGiles 03:52, 9 April 2007 (CEST)
Main Page Update
The amount of content is such that we should start thinking of a new layout that allows for a better categorization of articles.
Any ideas?
Editorial tone
Hello all,
As a quick reminder of policy, please be sure to avoid statements that are quantifiable.
For example, if you have had a bad experience with an agent handling your request, please limit any statement to that experience, rather than applying it to the company as a whole.
The purpose of the wiki is education - if you add a comment or content, please be sure that its goal is educating the world about spam above all else. This forum's reputation exists solely based upon its being as objective as possible.
Thanks! --WikiForseti 15:45, 14 April 2007 (CEST)
Agreed. My prior comments had no place here. I just really hate getting the run-around from anyone. :) --Jonacs 17:56, 14 April 2007 (CEST)
Impersonal tone
As a reminder to all contributors: do not use "i", "we", "me" etc. The tone of the wiki shall be impersonal and objective. Personal opinions should not be found within the wiki, and statements containing factual information should preferably be accompanied by sources or evidence.
Thank you MarkGiles for bringing this up.
What Belongs?
I've been adding generic info re: computing (eg proxy), but wikipedia is always going to be more comprehensive for that sort of thing. Should the content of this wiki be restricted to unquestionably spam-related content (eg spammed domains, spammer slang, etc) or should I carry on adding the odd tidbit here and there?
On the one hand, as stated, wikipedia will be more comprehensive, but on the other, there may be specifically spam-related information to add that wikipedia might not catch; eg the way spammers make heavy use of proxies.
Basically, I'm asking for thoughts about scope.
--Nectau 02:41, 24 May 2007 (CEST)
Adding the various articles is good, because it allows for a rapid reference to special words. For the form, I suggest that the definitions in the SpamWiki focus on just the basic definition + how it is specially used in the context of spam. There should be a further reading section at the end, where we can add links to wikipedia if the reader wishes more information on that particular topic. --WikiForseti 07:54, 24 May 2007 (CEST)
that's the stance I was leaning towards. thanks for replying. --Nectau 12:13, 24 May 2007 (CEST)
mail exchanges with support
I feel that the posting of e-mail exchanges with various companies distracts from the article and tends more towards complaining than reporting. Therefore, unless the posting of e-mail exchanges with support is in itsself of interest (ex. the topic of analysis), it is better that they be placed in the "Discussion" tab for the article.
In the article itself, after stating a claim that "so-and-so registrar is non-responsive", simply make a hyperlink from that statement to the sample provided in the discussion page. This will keep the articles easier to read, and more to-the-point.
