I believe that these kinds of actions should include a "statement of purpose". Is it because we think that these pages are irrelevant and/or confusing and wish to emphasize different content?
At the moment, I am thinking particularly of https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Stories/JohnHowland here. The primary link from that page is a dead link BUT https://web.archive.org/web/20200530164107/http://www.cs.trinity.edu/About/The_Courses/cs301/ (for example) is currently still valid. (It might fail at some point in the future, if some people make analogous decisions). And, that web archive page starts off with a bunch of content that is probably irrelevant to us, but if you scroll down to the bottom, there's still copies of many (perhaps most? all?) of his course notes for cs201 with both J and Scheme copies of his course notes in webarchive. Removing the references would make this even more difficult to find. So it might make sense to update the link to point into webarchive (with a suggestion to scroll to the bottom) rather than deleting that page. It also might make sense to capture a copy of his course notes from that site and repost them in the archive (along with a disclaimer to guard against the slight chance that this decision might eventually become contentious). But, without a statement of purpose, it's difficult to reason about these kinds of issues. I am also hesitant about the LAPACK page, for similar reasons. Thanks, -- Raul On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 11:52 PM 'robert therriault' via Programming <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > A quick update on some of the progress that we have made this week on > identifying some of the candidates for archiving on the current wiki, but > first a note on what archiving actually means. When a page is archived it is > only seen by administrators. This means that it can be retrieved if it is > required, but would not be found in any standard search. For most people the > page will have effectively disappeared and because of this we would like you > to take a look at the following pages and let us know if there is a reason > that you believe that they should be kept available in the regular wiki. Many > of them would be useful if they were updated and then the question is whether > it is worthwhile to update them. > > So the choice is yours, if we hear nothing about keeping these pages, in a > few weeks they will go away. Next week there will be a few more pages to > review as the Wiki Updating Project continues and our group of wiki workers > explores the site. If you would like to join us and be part of this > development let us know, we would be glad to have you. All correspondence on > this topic should be done on the general forum. > > All of the pages for this group were written for J602 > J6/Grid an efficient spreadsheet control for J > JDB an earlier version of Jd > J6/OpenGL a 3D graphics API > J6/Project Manager application IDE and build system > J6/Splitter a splitter control for J > J6/Treeview a treeview control for J > > These are a bit more of a miscellaneous group. > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Addons/general/pcall/test_disp > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Community/IRC/Jevalbot > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Guides/J_CSharp > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Interfaces > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Interfaces/APL > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Interfaces/SOAP_Web_Service/Details > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Interfaces/VBScript/exZ > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Stories/JohnHowland > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Studio/Application_Distribution_-_Installer > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Studio/Building_Applications > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Studio/LAPACK > > > Cheers, bob > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
