Archived Pages / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page Archived Pages.

Quikngruvn 13 Aug 2011 16:01

Troy, I reverted from the module to manual entry because the module can't list the names of these SCPs, and this is (I believe) the only place where their names are listed. If not for the loss of their names, I would have left it alone.

TroyL 13 Aug 2011 16:42

Ahh… I gotcha, Quik. My bad. Didn't even think about that.

---

"WELL FOUNDATION. YOU MADE IT SO EASY. SO VERY VERY EASY." - dimensionpotato

SophosBlitz 13 Aug 2011 21:32

I wonder if we could shove names into meta tags or something and extract them on pages like this one. d_d b_b

Bland 13 Aug 2011 22:20

I'd advise NOT editing the Meta information unless you REALLY know what you're doing.

TroyL 13 Aug 2011 23:44

We could do that, but Bland is right. I don't feel confident doing it at all, and— with no offense intended toward anyone else— I don't feel confident asking anyone to do it either.

---

"WELL FOUNDATION. YOU MADE IT SO EASY. SO VERY VERY EASY." - dimensionpotato

Bland 14 Aug 2011 00:06

This is entirely the wrong thread for this. -yoric

Last edited on 14 Aug 2011 03:17 by tunedtoadeadchannel Show more

SophosBlitz 14 Aug 2011 01:04

…that button is connected to your Gmail account.

I would vote no for anything non-Wikidot-related unless we're moving away. (Also wrong thread)

(account deleted) 17 Aug 2015 17:38

Decommissioned SCPs is tagged "archived" and appears to be a supplement to SCP Object Classes. Why is it not listed here?

Zyn 17 Aug 2015 17:45

Probably because -D SCPs are inherently different from -ARC SCPs. Staff was also restructuring the way -D articles would be displayed on the site (I think?) so that might be the reason.

Wait a second

AHI-3000 19 Jul 2017 23:49

Didn't this page used to be linked in the site navigation (along with Decommissioned SCPs)? Why was it removed?

Last edited on 19 Jul 2017 23:50 by AHI-3000 Show more

Zaknel 15 Oct 2017 18:09

Would it be wrong to edit archived SCP'S to fix grammar errors the way you would a regular SCP?

---

Humanity has survived on two things:
1. Camaraderie.
2. Learning from our mistakes.

Last edited on 22 Oct 2017 15:10 by Zaknel Show more

Decibelles 15 Oct 2017 19:11

I think archived SCPs should stay as they are with no further edits, grammar mistakes and all. That's my take on it. Improving them bit by bit would just end up as making them different from how they were archived, which isn't the point; archived stuff should be, well, archived.

Kammiesworld2013 24 Feb 2019 05:02

What about the old 1822 ("Colonization Guide")? http://web.archive.org/web/20180625174309/http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-1822 It's needed for the Straight On Till Morning canon and its tales.

"Legacy Documentation" Category

Ziakial 19 Nov 2019 02:24

ngl having 049-ARC being amongst the other -ARC'd SCPs despite being ARC'd for different reasons and being an -ARC of an SCP still on the site is sort of off-putting.

I propose adding a third category to the -ARC skips called "Legacy Documentation" which would fit 049-ARC, and quite possibly any future SCP that would requiring -ARCing after a drastic rewrite.