Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland/Members

message: There are many inactive members on the active members list, so I'm going to move them but increase the inactivity period from three months to six-months. Any objections? ww2censor (talk) 12:34, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks User:Ww2censor - I’ve been going through it and have removed a bunch who have been inactive for not less than 1 year. But it’s rather time consuming. The list is such a joke that I think it should be removed entirely. I’ve been finding people who’ve been inactive for a decade plus….  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.199.208.11 (talk) 03:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections here. Bibby (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I still see the list as having value, but, having done a little cleanup last year, I agree it could be better maintained.  I do think that it is important to a sense of a community-within-community to have a place where people can "sign-up" / make some commitment, and it is a routine feature of both wiki projects and wiki drives. SeoR (talk) 18:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: User:SeoR. Does that mean you are undertaking to finish the cleanup? If so, when do you think you’ll have it done by? Frenchmalawi (talk) 18:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Challenge taken, I will help, and would plan to do this, as last time, within a week.  Last time I was very conservative, this time I will use the modified rule of 2017 - 6 months' inactivity, down a step, 24 months, to the "former" list. SeoR (talk) 19:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: good man but let’s do a better job than last time. As per edit history on the page, I found editors whose last edit was in the 00s.Frenchmalawi (talk) 19:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Will do - last time I took out only some very obvious inactives, and I think it was the same in 2017, these were not comprehensive sweeps.  This time I'm going deeper.  No one wanted or wants to discourage anyone but I now think that was the wrong logic - I agree with the sentiment above in so far as that a list like this is only useful if members show some evidence of actual relatively recent activity.  In turn, of course, most editing on Ireland-related articles is actually done by fewer than 50 editors, many but not all of whom are even members here, but that's a separate point. SeoR (talk) 11:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of removing editor's names entirely I agree with SeoR moving them to an inactive list so long as there has been some activity in recent years. They can always reactivate themselves when and if they return to activity. ww2censor (talk) 14:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  well done Censor, I’m sure you’ll pitch in to do the work if SeoR runs out of steam. Top class both. Anyway, we’ll see where we’ve got to by next week.  Frenchmalawi (talk) 21:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

text: 33 active members, of whom 2/3 are probably materially active - and then there're another 20-30 active across, or in particular pockets of, Ireland-related articles, and so many more occasionally passing by.  Having sacrificed my Wiki time for today to this, back to article reviews and some article development from tomorrow, I hope. SeoR (talk) 23:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  By the by, , can we add you to the Active list? You've been around a long time, and you've put a deal of that time into Ireland-related matters?  You're just one of several obvious missing names (also the indefatigable Guliolopez, Shiela1988, Edl-irishboy, The Banner, WMIrl coordinator Smirkybec, edit-millionaire and category expert BrownHairedGirl, Djm-leighpark, FinanceFactz (and alter ego), Sarah777, several key GAA editors, and many more, not to speak of serious editors of the past, some of whom still show up at times)... Maybe I'll ping a few people about signing-up, as the more (real contributors), the better it feels. I wonder if someone has a quick script that can list editors (say the top 50) on WPrj-Ireland pages in the last x months... past lists have been manual jobs, and that's hard. SeoR (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: User:SeoR, I should be honoured Sir to rank amongst a list of names, so distinguished. With humility, I accept this honour. P.s. well done for getting the list in shape. Over the years I think WP has become more and more about administration rather than creativity or intellect. I explored the list of supposedly ‘active’ Ireland Project editors because I thought it looked wildly too long. I tend to think that more and more articles are simply controlled now by relatively small cabals.  Discussion, historically active and sparky, is so often shut down now through use of elaborate administrative procedures. ‘This can’t discussed on the subject page; has to be discussed there using some complex procedure which for those who are ‘part-timers’ is too much to grasp etc.’. I’m glad to see a somewhat more realistic list. To give you an example of my complaint, my edit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ashanti_Protectorate&type=revision&diff=1044978195&oldid=1043935867 - Basically I’ve pointed out that the article in question should not exist but I don’t understand how to get it deleted and don’t have the patience to learn new procedures. I appealed for help and made a suitable edit to the article to explain why it should not exist… but one usually gets little interest. Just lots of rules and procedures thrown about. The substantive point was never disputed and months later we still have an article on WP that should not exist. Rant over. Frenchmalawi (talk) 18:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Active/Inactive members