2
\$\begingroup\$

Ok, this site is well over a year old. Pretty much everything discussed in meta during that time is still here. Unfortunately, not everything discussed during that time is still applicable!

I'd appreciate anyone who could take a little time looking at this backlog and doing two things.

  1. Identify the "good stuff" - I'd like to identify our FAQ items, the core nuggets that anyone who would like to take the time to read a bit can use to answer their questions and common issues about how the site is run.
  2. Identify the "bad stuff" - things in meta that are no longer applicable. Let's close/delete anything that could be misconstrued by a new user. We don't want people to point to a meta post as justification if the site no longer works that way!

As you find things, add links to them as answers here. The moderators will check on everything and take the appropriate steps.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I'm not too sure of the value of cleaning up meta. Cleaning up the main site, sure. But there's historical value in how things progressed here at the meta level. And it prevents the same darn questions from just being asked again by a noob. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk says reinstate Monica Jan 4 '12 at 0:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @mxyzplk - the main thing I want to do is populate the faq tag. Currently ours is empty, which is not so good. Getting rid of obsolete crap is just a bonus. \$\endgroup\$ – Pat Ludwig Jan 4 '12 at 5:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ Should we make this a community wiki with a few answers and then close it? That way we can add FAQ Candidates to one answer, things to be deleted to another. Is there a better system on SE to do this? \$\endgroup\$ – Pureferret Jan 4 '12 at 11:34
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Pureferret - no, there is no value to CW on meta, and closing this sends at best mixed signals. I'll be happy to deal with any problem related to too much activity on this question, trust me! \$\endgroup\$ – Pat Ludwig Jan 4 '12 at 15:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ Is there ever any value to CW then? \$\endgroup\$ – Pureferret Jan 4 '12 at 15:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Pureferret - for questions, very little. \$\endgroup\$ – Pat Ludwig Jan 4 '12 at 15:39
1
\$\begingroup\$

To Be Expunged

This request for contributions that ended August 1st. closed

What happened to that answer. should stay open

The temporary chat listing, now that we have a real one. deleted

Dungeons and Dragons and Ampersands. investigate

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I closed 2 of them but not 2 others that are time-over (rfc and chat), but don't think any should be deleted. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk says reinstate Monica Jan 4 '12 at 13:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ Deleted the chat one and edited your answer to reflect the outcome of each. I agree with @mxyzplk that the second should stay open. I think we have a better post for the 4th with the more recent discussion D&D tag discussion. I'll find that and maybe dup the older one to it with a note that it has been superceded. \$\endgroup\$ – Pat Ludwig Jan 4 '12 at 17:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ Hmmm - meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/669/… was what I was thinking of I believe. It has a whole lot of extra cruft and doesn't directly address the tagging in the question. Will leave this for later and look for more low-hanging fruit. \$\endgroup\$ – Pat Ludwig Jan 4 '12 at 17:21
1
\$\begingroup\$

Added to the FAQ

Candidates for the FAQ

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .