Wikipediareview.com Going Down? Lights Out?

Unread post by **Triptych** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:41 pm

If you go to http://wikipediareview.com right now there's a Godaddy.com message says the domain expired yesterday. Uh oh. Maybe the owner is somebody like me who lets things go to the last minute too much, and then does some flurrying with phonecalls, emails, and a credit card. Or maybe it is really the end of the road for Wikipedia Review.

I was never a member there, I've only participated at Wikipediocracy. But I know most of the core team and a lot of the members here essentially came here from there.

There's a great deal of interesting stuff there, important stuff in terms of Wikipedia criticism history, that I hope doesn't get lost forever. I mean I guess Google cache and Archive.org probably have a great deal of it, but there's going to be gaping holes that gape more over time.

If there's still some intrigue and rivalry with Wikipedia Review amongst the members and management here, now might be a moment to move in and swipe the domain name. You snooze you lose, in other words.

lilburne · Unread post by **lilburne** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 4:49 pm

This is what happened 2 years ago. It remains to be seen whether the boss lady returns this time.

neved · Unread post by **neved** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:04 pm

It would be a pity to loose some topics especially the arbcom leaks.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:17 pm

Triptych wrote:If you go to http://wikipediareview.com right now there's a Godaddy.com message says the domain expired yesterday.
...

If there's still some intrigue and rivalry with Wikipedia Review amongst the members and management here, now might be a moment to move in and swipe the domain name. You snooze you lose, in other words.

Even if there was any intrigue, the name just got renewed...
ICANN Registrar:GODADDY.COM, LLCCreated:2006-01-16
Expires:2015-01-16 Updated:2014-01-17

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:33 pm

Midsize Jake has a copy of the WR database, taken in (I believe) early 2012 or so. He's vowed to host it somewhere, if WR1 ever goes permanently dark. I think.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:51 pm

thekohser wrote:Midsize Jake has a copy of the WR database, taken in (I believe) early 2012 or so. He's vowed to host it somewhere, if WR1 ever goes permanently dark. I think.

Correct. The only issue was how long we should wait before assuming it's not going to come back. We got to two weeks the last time, and I was just about to pull the trigger and buy a hosting plan, but Selina somehow managed to work out a deal with the person whose credit card she uses just in the nick of time. Hosting plans aren't that expensive of course... the real money would be in buying a legal Invision Powerboard license, which WR evidently never had, since Day One.

We could also convert the database to some other boardware package, but realistically it would be read-only at that point, and I'm pretty sure there would be glitches all over the place. Still, maybe read-only would be better for all concerned.

It's actually been long enough now - two years! - that while the broken links would be an annoyance, I suspect nobody would really care all that much.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:22 pm

That reminds me. It's irritating that someone (Selina?) stole @wikipediocracy on Twitter. Have any of the WO staff considered reporting them for impersonation and trying to get the username back? Here's the form. Could well be worth doing after forming the company.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:43 pm

Hex wrote:That reminds me. It's irritating that someone (Selina?) stole @wikipediocracy on Twitter. Have any of the WO staff considered reporting them for impersonation and trying to get the username back? Here's the form. Could well be worth doing after forming the company.

Apparently Twitter support has been spectacularly useless on this issue.
We will probably try again after incorporation, if that's the right term.
Edit: I have slid a few posts in the dustbin as apparently we're again trying something.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:28 am

Midsize Jake wrote:It's actually been long enough now - two years! - that while the broken links would be an annoyance, I suspect nobody would really care all that much.

With respect, those broken links will be a little more than an annoyance. Our book wiki depends on hundreds of WR threads. I've tried to take captures of major ones (the Arbcom leaks and the old book club are safe and sound, for example), but there are too many others to save. And frankly, many of them are full of off-topic jabbering that would be wasteful to save.

Yes, Jake, if it doesn't reappear, please host an old backup. Anything after the end of 2010 isn't even really necessary, just the early material.

Unread post by **Peter Damian** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 9:36 am

EricBarbour wrote:
Midsize Jake wrote:It's actually been long enough now - two years! - that while the broken links would be an annoyance, I suspect nobody would really care all that much.
With respect, those broken links will be a little more than an annoyance. Our book wiki depends on hundreds of WR threads. I've tried to take captures of major ones (the Arbcom leaks and the old book club are safe and sound, for example), but there are too many others to save. And frankly, many of them are full of off-topic jabbering that would be wasteful to save.

Yes, Jake, if it doesn't reappear, please host an old backup. Anything after the end of 2010 isn't even really necessary, just the early material.

There is a search and replace function on the wiki, which will work so long as the identifier number is still the same. Will that be the case?

E.g. this link http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15609 points to topic 15609. Is it possible to change the URL to read e.g. http://newurl.com/index.php?showtopic=15609 ?

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:37 pm

Peter Damian wrote:There is a search and replace function on the wiki, which will work so long as the identifier number is still the same. Will that be the case?

E.g. this link http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15609 points to topic 15609. Is it possible to change the URL to read e.g. http://newurl.com/index.php?showtopic=15609 ?

Well, again, assuming this ever actually happens, I should think so. If it's running on Invision Powerboard, that should be practically automatic, and if not, then I guess it would involve setting up index.php in the main directory to re-form the URL as required and redirect to it.

Beyond that, we probably shouldn't be discussing the details in a public thread - though at this point I doubt Selina reads any of this stuff anymore, and probably goes for months at a time without logging in to WR at all, much less doing any maintenance or post-approvals. Since most of the sane members are "on moderation," the whole site might as well be read-only already. Anyone posting there should be aware that once Selina stops paying for good, literally everything they've posted there since March 2012 will not make it onto the archive/successor site, and will be lost for eternity.

Cedric · Unread post by **Cedric** » Sat Jan 18, 2014 8:30 pm

EricBarbour wrote:
Midsize Jake wrote:It's actually been long enough now - two years! - that while the broken links would be an annoyance, I suspect nobody would really care all that much.
With respect, those broken links will be a little more than an annoyance. Our book wiki depends on hundreds of WR threads. I've tried to take captures of major ones (the Arbcom leaks and the old book club are safe and sound, for example), but there are too many others to save. And frankly, many of them are full of off-topic jabbering that would be wasteful to save.

Yes, Jake, if it doesn't reappear, please host an old backup. Anything after the end of 2010 isn't even really necessary, just the early material.

This jives pretty well with my own memory of things. It seemed to me that we were running adrift the last year to eighteen months preceding the March 2012 crack-up of WR.

Is it just me, or has anyone else come to the conclusion that Selina did us a huge favor, backhanded though it was, by effectively driving us away from WR? It did not take long before it became apparent that WPO was going to be a better moderated and more on-the-ball forum than what WR had become by that time.

It's not that I no longer believe that there is something worth preserving from the old WR, but I have to agree with Eric that anything after 2010 is probably no great loss. Not only that, but anything lost from 2012 on is likely a boon to humanity.

EDIT: Well, except for this, I suppose.

Michaeldsuarez · Unread post by **Michaeldsuarez** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:04 pm

Has anyone tried contacting Selina yet?

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:05 pm

Michaeldsuarez wrote:Has anyone tried contacting Selina yet?

We all just assumed you were gonna do it...?

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Wed Jan 22, 2014 6:42 pm

Midsize Jake wrote:
Michaeldsuarez wrote:Has anyone tried contacting Selina yet?
We all just assumed you were gonna do it...?

Yeah, you can do it, Michael. Since you're obviously into self-abuse. (Wait till she's taken her mirtazapine first.)

Michaeldsuarez · Unread post by **Michaeldsuarez** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 5:18 pm

I believe that I've waited long enough. I've sent Selina an Email. I'm not sure if she'll see it, since she's not fond of Email and "old fashion" forms of communication, but it's the only means I have for contacting her at the moment. Also, instead of mocking her, perhaps you should consider reconciliation.

Someone is also spamming the Wikipedia article with the Emperor's phony version of the Wikipedia Review.

dogbiscuit · Unread post by **dogbiscuit** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 5:51 pm

Michaeldsuarez wrote:I believe that I've waited long enough. I've sent Selina an Email. I'm not sure if she'll see it, since she's not fond of Email and "old fashion" forms of communication, but it's the only means I have for contacting her at the moment. Also, instead of mocking her, perhaps you should consider reconciliation.

Someone is also spamming the Wikipedia article with the Emperor's phony version of the Wikipedia Review.

At times you show how little you understand what is going on, unless your objective is simply to increase the drama content of the net.

If you had any insight into what really went on at WR then you wouldn't be making comments about reconciliation. FWIW the team bent over backwards and suggests to try and make allowances for her paranoia and seek ways to keep WR functional but it wasn't to be. There is no upside to having Selina involved in this sort of venture, for both our sakes and hers. WR should be allowed to rest in peace, as should Selina.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 5:54 pm

Michaeldsuarez wrote:...instead of mocking her, perhaps you should consider reconciliation.

I'd like Selina to know that I'm perfectly happy to move along the path of reconciliation, when she takes the first step and releases to us the squatter Wikipediocracy accounts on Facebook and Twitter.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 5:55 pm

Michaeldsuarez wrote:I believe that I've waited long enough. I've sent Selina an Email. I'm not sure if she'll see it, since she's not fond of Email and "old fashion" forms of communication, but it's the only means I have for contacting her at the moment.

If my experience is any guide, she'll get it sometime during the next two weeks, and since you have an account here, she'll either ignore you completely or reply with "I don't see how you can associate yourself with those scummy bastards" or something along those lines. (More likely the former, I suspect.)

Also, instead of mocking her, perhaps you should consider reconciliation.

You think we haven't tried? Don't be stupid.

Unread post by **Poetlister** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:50 pm

And Andy Dingley pronounces the death sentence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =592665046

Alison · Unread post by **Alison** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:53 pm

Poetlister wrote:And Andy Dingley pronounces the death sentence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =592665046

Andy can cool his heels before he does the grave-dancing thing. It's only been two weeks.

Alison · Unread post by **Alison** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:57 pm

Alison wrote:
Poetlister wrote:And Andy Dingley pronounces the death sentence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =592665046
Andy can cool his heels before he does the grave-dancing thing. It's only been two weeks.

Hi, Andy!!

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:16 pm

The WHOIS results from both GoDaddy and Network Solutions are saying the domain hasn't been renewed, at least as of this moment. So if Mr. Zoloft's post earlier was accurate, that could mean... what? That the credit card was denied after an initial approval? That's the only explanation that makes sense - maybe someone cancelled the card immediately after it was used to make the payment.

The hosting account is still active, so folks can still get to the site via the IP address, FWIW.

Oh well.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:20 pm

Alison wrote: Hi, Andy!!

Always nice to see a dedicated Wikipediocracy reader

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:23 pm

Midsize Jake wrote: The hosting account is still active, so folks can still get to the site via the IP address, FWIW.

Front page links are causing some problems by redirecting to the .com at present so you need to fiddle with the URLs. Here's the WR thread about what's going on.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:25 pm

Andy should take a moment and realize we're actually being more than fair (as individuals, not as a 'cabal') to a site that banned almost all of us and then spit on us.

Group hug, Andy?

lilburne · Unread post by **lilburne** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:26 pm

Nope that thread was the 2 years ago hiccup

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:27 pm

Hex wrote:
Midsize Jake wrote: The hosting account is still active, so folks can still get to the site via the IP address, FWIW.
Front page links are causing some problems by redirecting to the .com at present so you need to fiddle with the URLs. Here's the WR thread about what's going on.

That one is from 2012, when she also failed to renew for a while.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:28 pm

lilburne wrote:Nope that thread was the 2 years ago hiccup

You're right, sorry about that. The "January 23rd" jumped out at me and I missed the year.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:33 pm

Hex wrote:
lilburne wrote:Nope that thread was the 2 years ago hiccup
You're right, sorry about that. The "January 23rd" jumped out at me and I missed the year.

Wikipedia Review is a roller-coaster of confusion.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:34 pm

Zoloft wrote:Andy should take a moment and realize we're actually being more than fair (as individuals, not as a 'cabal') to a site that banned almost all of us and then spit on us.

Group hug, Andy?

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:54 pm

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Hex · Unread post by **Hex** » Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:11 pm

You know that everyone was thinking it.

WR does appear to be pining for the fjords at the moment.

Alison · Unread post by **Alison** » Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:59 am

For the record, an' all that, it's back up again. I don't know when that happened as I don't hang out there (I was banned for over 1000 years - literally) but the fact that nobody else seems to have noticed kinda says it all ...

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:45 am

Hah. Last post 16 January, just before it vanished. "Arrrr, Cap'n, we be bound ta drift! Arrrr!"

greybeard · Unread post by **greybeard** » Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:58 am

Alison wrote:For the record, an' all that, it's back up again. I don't know when that happened as I don't hang out there (I was banned for over 1000 years - literally) but the fact that nobody else seems to have noticed kinda says it all ...

They changed DNS servers (from domaincontrol.com to HostGator, their hosting site), but there is no indication that the domain name has been renewed.

Base on an expiration date of 16 January, if GoDaddy is the registrar (it's hidden behind Domains By Proxy, so I can't be sure), then today (11 Feb) the domain goes to GoDaddy's auction, which continues for 10 days. If unsold, it goes to a "closeout" auction for 5 days. If still unsold, the domain name is released back to the registry on day 43. Until then, Selina (or whomever) can renew it.

Other registrars (annoying) have different timelines, mostly longer. When the WHOIS data shows "Redemption Period" or "Pending Delete", then it really is going. It appears that GoDaddy does everything they can to keep domains under their roof.

Unread post by **Triptych** » Tue Feb 18, 2014 2:12 pm

I was musing about whether Kohser's grand plan to get this website tax-characterized as a not-for-profit organization, in layman's term a charity, could be successful. (Among the public services it provides is a criticism platform of Wikipedia which has become dominant in search results and thus overwhelming influence on the public consciousness.) So I thought, well I wonder if he got the "wikipediocracy.org" domain, presumably a more likely designation for a not-for-profit.

Lo and behold, that domain was snatched by Wikipedia Review and subverted as a redirect there. The "wikipediocracy.net" domain was also so purloined and so warped. This is foul doings.

I felt funny for a bit because, admittedly, I started this thread with the suggestion that Wikipediocracy grab the expired wikipediareview.com URL, *but* it was never my meaning that it should be reconfigured as a redirect here. I meant only take control of it, keep it basically intact, and online as wikipediareview.com. What Wikipedia Review has done has a whiff of deceit. People who type "Wikipediocracy.ANYTHING" want to get to Wikipediocracy.

I figure the management here was well aware of this, but FYI anyway. If it's going to take a cash payout to handle these problems, it's probably better to do so now rather than later.

Unread post by **tarantino** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 8:40 pm

Looks like Selina didn't pay the hosting fees.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 9:56 pm

tarantino wrote:Looks like Selina didn't pay the hosting fees.

So happy to be out from under that circus tent.

SB_Johnny · Unread post by **SB_Johnny** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 11:28 pm

thekohser wrote:
tarantino wrote:Looks like Selina didn't pay the hosting fees.
So happy to be out from under that circus tent.

Doesn't this happen once a year or so?

Unread post by **tarantino** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:10 am

SB_Johnny wrote:
thekohser wrote:
tarantino wrote:Looks like Selina didn't pay the hosting fees.
So happy to be out from under that circus tent.
Doesn't this happen once a year or so?

It's usually her forgetting to renew the domain name.

Unread post by **Poetlister** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 11:45 am

SB_Johnny wrote:
thekohser wrote:
tarantino wrote:Looks like Selina didn't pay the hosting fees.
So happy to be out from under that circus tent.
Doesn't this happen once a year or so?

It's nice to have these annual traditions.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:03 pm

tarantino wrote:
SB_Johnny wrote:
thekohser wrote:
tarantino wrote:Looks like Selina didn't pay the hosting fees.
So happy to be out from under that circus tent.
Doesn't this happen once a year or so?
It's usually her forgetting to renew the domain name.

Not this time: Expiration Date: 16-jan-2016

Probably hasn't been paying HostGator or whatever server "she" is using.

Stan Dixon · Unread post by **Stan Dixon** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 11:01 pm

So when would Midsize Jake accept that it would be time to provide the downloaded snapshot? Would the archive be merged here in some form? Or is it all BS?

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Sat Jul 04, 2015 1:10 am

Stan Dixon wrote:So when would Midsize Jake accept that it would be time to provide the downloaded snapshot? Would the archive be merged here in some form? Or is it all BS?

I usually give her a couple of weeks, maybe as much as a month if I'm unusually busy or if she actually answers my e-mails.

I do have a funny feeling about this one, though... anyway, merging the database isn't an easy thing to do, and a variety of confidential stuff has to be removed if it's a raw data dump. The whole thing is a bit of a mess, but we'll eventually figure something out.

Stan Dixon · Unread post by **Stan Dixon** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:53 am

So the comedy rattles on?

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 9:20 am

Stan Dixon wrote:So the comedy rattles on?

The site, indeed, is back online.

Auggie · Unread post by **Auggie** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:10 pm

Hooray!

SB_Johnny · Unread post by **SB_Johnny** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:12 pm

Auggie wrote:

Hooray!

Now if only you could convince her to allow new accounts, it might even come to life again.

Auggie · Unread post by **Auggie** » Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:21 pm

SB_Johnny wrote:
Auggie wrote:

Hooray!
Now if only you could convince her to allow new accounts, it might even come to life again.

Never hurts to ask. I just posted there.