Hi all,
I've just noticed that Nominet have made two-letter UK domains available for
release:
http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrants/aboutdomainnames/reserved/releaselist/
This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be useful
for Wikipedia somehow?
(The deadline for ap
On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel wrote:
> This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be
> useful for Wikipedia somehow?
> (The deadline for applying is apparently in just under a week's time.)
Hey, why not? Nominet domains cost very little (a few quid a year).
-
It's worth grabbing them to prevent anyone else getting them and
misusing them, if nothing else. As David says, the cost is pretty
minimal.
I'd get wp.co.uk, wp.org.uk, wp.net.uk and the same with wm.
On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've just noticed that Nominet have mad
Definitely should be on top of wm.org.uk, you could use that for the
shortened url for the Wikimedia UK page,
Alex
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> It's worth grabbing them to prevent anyone else getting them and
> misusing them, if nothing else. As David says, the cost is
On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've just noticed that Nominet have made two-letter UK domains available for
> release:
> http://www.nominet.org.uk/registrants/aboutdomainnames/reserved/releaselist/
>
> This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would
Agree with Tom and David - get them
-Original Message-
From: wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Michael Peel
Sent: 09 June 2011 12:43
To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimediauk-l] two-letter UK domain
On 9 June 2011 13:03, David Gerard wrote:
> On 9 June 2011 12:42, Michael Peel wrote:
>
>> This includes wp.co.uk/wp.org.uk/etc. - does anyone think these would be
>> useful for Wikipedia somehow?
>> (The deadline for applying is apparently in just under a week's time.)
>
>
> Hey, why not? Nomin
Hi,
Any Wikipedians fancy helping out with an event sometime during 15-17 July
for what is probably a wiki-lounge type affair with potential for a
Wikimedia presentation aimed at curators and a possible behind-the-scenes
with a curator? This would be co-editing and a bit of coaching with museum
pr
Hi Fae,
I've no qualifications for this other than being a Wikipedian who
would like to help this, but I'm available.
WSC
On 9 June 2011 14:48, Fae wrote:
> Hi,
> Any Wikipedians fancy helping out with an event sometime during 15-17 July
> for what is probably a wiki-lounge type affair with pot
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:16 PM, geni wrote:
> It's not even as if "wp" is that closely associated with Wikipedia.
> Online you have worldpress. Within the UK you have two police forces
> and that widening participation program.
>
>
Isn't that a good thing? Get some resale value? Maybe WMUK
could
With domain names I suggest ethical use; so if we are going to use them, or
it is so similar/recognisable that we don't want others using it, or there
is a high liklihood of spammers using them, or it is too specific a domain
(i.e. miss-spellings of Wikipedia) for it to be useful to anyone else - t
On 9 June 2011 13:16, geni wrote:
> Because it all adds up and if you actually use the names you have to
> keep paying for them.
It does all add up, but to a very small number. Let's say it's £5 per
year per domain (which I think is about right). 6 domains for the next
10 years would cost us £300
With these domain names, there is an extra £10 application fee, and if the
domain name is contested then it goes to auction with the highest bidder
winning - so the costs of these domains could be substantially higher than
usual.
If there was a really pressing reason for them - e.g. if they wou
I can see their use as a URL shortener.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at
times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or
something.
There's no pressing need, but it's a possibility. However, we'd probably
be better off getting something more
>
> I can see their use as a URL shortener.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at
> times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or
> something.
>
We already have enwp.org .
I think wm.org.uk or wm.co.uk will be very useful as URL shorteners f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/06/11 20:18, George Watson wrote:
> I can see their use as a URL shortener.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} gets a bit unweildy at
> times, compared to, for example, http://wp.org.uk/{{REVISIONID}} or
> something.
We currently h
The importance for QR codes is very important. I was not aware that we owned
enwp.org, just that we had use of it.
Roger
On 9 June 2011 20:24, Douglas Gardner wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/06/11 20:18, George Watson wrote:
> > I can see their use as a URL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't know if it's ours or not.
On 09/06/11 22:21, Roger Bamkin wrote:
> The importance for QR codes is very important. I was not aware that we owned
> enwp.org, just that we had use of it.
>
> Roger
>
>
>
>
> On 9 J
There was a thread on foundation-l not long ago; I think the person that
owns it offered it to the foundation, but conversation seemed to peter
out
Tom
On 9 June 2011 22:22, Douglas Gardner wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> For the avoidance of doubt, I don't know
19 matches
Mail list logo
