Forum:When to archive?

Archived discussion

This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page, other than for maintenance. If you wish to revisit this topic, please bring it up again in a new thread.

Forums: Index → Community discussions → When to archive? | Post

It occurs to me that we have an archived discussions section here, but we don't really have a good guideline for when a discussion is considered up for archival. Any thoughts on a good time to wait before archiving? -- LiR ^{speak ~ read} 20:49, November 7, 2012 (UTC)

Whilst I think that for the vast majority of discussions that we should keep them around until we get a definite answer, I'd say wait until it's dried up for a couple of weeks. I realise that discussions dying before we can get any answer has been, and still is, a major issue though to be honest I think that the community should step up and give sufficient input before they dry up... Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 14:27, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Ok, maybe this works better as two questions. How long after a conversation completes (i.e. a conclusion is reached) do we wait before we archive it? Alternately, how long after a conversation has dried up do we wait before archival? -- LiR ^{speak ~ read} 18:42, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but how was "archival" even implemented back when we still used the community talk page? I think it's just based on how long it's been since last time a topic is discussed. Nikel _{Talk – Vote!} 14:46, November 10, 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to bother making a new thread, so I'll post it here.

IMO, there's just a small thing that disturbs me about archiving a thread. Upon archiving, someone in the end will have to edit the forum header / page. This cause the last poster and the last edit time to change based on the archival time, which, I think, is incorrect, as we would expect the last poster and edit time to refer the discussion, not when it was archived. This may cause confusion when an admin archives multiple threads at the same time, or others might think there was a new post, which is not.

I know this is not an issue or something that needs to be resolved, but I think I just wanted to share my thoughts here. Nikel _{Talk – Vote!} 11:22, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

Nikel, I think what you're saying is valid. So I went over to Community Central to look at their forums. They archive threads in a slightly different manner than we do. Their Forumheader template actually includes a bit of wiki code that automatically displays an archival message after a period of days without an edit, based on the last edit timestamp to the page. I'm reasonably sure, with a little tweaking, we could add it to our Forumheader template and even include the proper category, so that it appears in the Archived threads section. I'll take a closer look at it and report back. -- LiR ^{speak ~ read} 15:25, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

Seeing as this thread has been active for a month with no real progress, I was going to archive it on the grounds of being dead (the irony). However I felt that I may as well comment now to save revisiting in a whole new thread later. The issue with the Community Central archive system is it goes by amount of time which may be an issue in the case of threads where we actually do get something out of it. To stay safe I'd rather go with the current system for peace of mind. Btw LiR, did you manage to get a detailed look at their template? Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 12:32, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

I did take a look at it but couldn't make heads-or-tails of how it actually functions. The only thing I could say with absolute certainty about it is that it archives 30 days after the last edit. Perhaps I'll bring it up at a later date if I can get the template to work here. - LiR ^{speak ~ read} 14:12, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Conclusion

Closed - Dead thread, may be revisited later. As for when to actually archive, it's best to say at least a couple of weeks but for now the process will be left to the discretion of the administrator who actually archives a thread. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 12:14, December 14, 2012 (UTC)

Revisited

I borrowed the code from the Community Central. It's already raw, so I don't know if I can change the code much. I'm trying to make the thread optional between auto-archive for 2 weeks and manual archival; one will override another option, so you won't see multiple archive parthenons at the same time. However, I can't say if it really works until I experiment it. I'd like to borrow this thread as well as the forum header template for tweaking. Nikel _{Talk – Vote!} 10:16, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I *guess* the auto-archival is up and running... However, based on my observation, there's one small flaw with this automated archival. What seems to be threads under "Active Threads" subsection don't go directly to "Archived Threads." I guess to do so, we have to manually archive the thread.

Somehow I think I've screwed up the entire archival system and categorization, but I think right now through my browser under the "Archived Threads" in the Community Discussions forum, all "archived" threads from different forums appear there. Are other forum threads not supposed to be archived?? Nikel _{Talk – Vote!} 10:53, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

ETA: The placement of threads under "Archived Threads" seems to take time. Just be patient, and it will place itself under correct subsection, eventually. Also, I've set so the archival only works on community discussions. Anyone has any opinions about this auto-archival? Nikel _{Talk – Vote!} 11:31, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

Just as a side note for future reference, it's generally a better idea to revisit a topic in a new thread and reference back to this one if need be.

As for the system in general, I'd honestly rather use the manual system just because it's less maintenance and can be applied for any situation of where a thread could be archived. It's worth mentioning that the forums on Community Central were aimed for more general purpose threads that just die automatically and are not really used for consensus, which is what the raw code was structured for. It may be possible to rewrite the code but given a lot of threads here that are aimed at generating consensus require a manual archive, I think it would be safer to go that route.

Finally, only Community discussions threads should be archived mainly down to a known issue that just lists anything under Archived threads regardless of forum. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 14:33, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

I personally don't feel comfortable to start a new thread for something related... where something has just been recently discussed about. Anyway, Since I've made both manual and automated archival optional, I think we can leave it as it is now... For reference, the thread will be auto-archived in 2 weeks. Nikel _{Talk – Vote!} 14:47, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

Closed (again) - Dead/resolved as it's getting. Lost Labyrinth • (c) • (b) 17:10, January 13, 2013 (UTC)