Talk:List of active users

From RationalWikiWiki

We can't get any statistics off the site to do this can we? While I'm on the subject, total number of edits ever would be a nice number to have as well. Even better would be to sort it by talk page and article page. Hey! we would do it like CP! Make (joke) recommendations that those who don't fulfill some arbitrary article edit count be blocked or something.--User:FalseFlag^{Flag Me} 16:20, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Sounds like a lot of work. --Hans Johnson _{I'll get my hans on it} 16:43, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Manually yes. But is any of it available automatically?--User:FalseFlag^{Flag Me} 16:58, 7 March 2008 (EST)

No way I know of. We should ask Human. --Hans Johnson _{I'll get my hans on it} 17:02, 7 March 2008 (EST)

Wildly inaccurate now. Needs updating. 92.40.25.238 20:08, 27 June 2008 (CDT)

Sign in and fix it then! human^{be in} 20:16, 27 June 2008 (CDT)

Contents 1 Update= 2 Mess 3 HAHA 4 Delete? 5 Here goes nothing, then

[edit] Update=

SRSLY. This is... wow. To work! Tyrannis 13:05, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Just copy the list from RW:AU, methinks. Liveware Problem 14:59, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

ok. hold on a bit. 173.253.148.133 15:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Forgot to login. Ok, I'll go do that. Tyrannis 15:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

And now I have even more redlinks to get rid of. Let's see ~1 a day... hmm. Tyrannis 16:24, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Mess

How could we clean this up?Ty 03:20, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh, it could use some explanations and updates. Liveware Problem 03:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

[edit] HAHA

2060 edits so far this month. Ty 01:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, don't expect that again. Ty 00:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Delete?

The problem with a list like this is that it requires a constant updating and, as this is a low-use Wiki, we don't really have the staffing available to constantly update an article like this. With that in mind, what say we that we delete this article as it is an exercise in futility through obsolescence? Punky McPunkersen 14:03, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

RW:AU covers this perfectly well. Blast it into oblivion. Tyrannis^{An iron, yet caring fist} 14:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Vote to delete. Refugee 15:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Here goes nothing, then

I just hope I don't break the Wiki, as I keep getting the "Big Delete" warning when I go to delete. Punky McPunkersen 12:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

That's because, when I still had server access, I set the "Big Delete" flag to go off for articles with an absurdly low number of edits. Hans Johnson _{I'll get my hans on it} 09:38, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense. That would've been funny, though, if a 95-edit deletion would've crashed the Wiki. Oh well, there's always next year.... Punky McPunkersen 12:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

With how unstable RWW is most of the time, I wouldn't be surprised if you could crash it by deleting an article with 10 edits. Armondikov 17:02, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm quite curious as to what this big delete warning looks like. I hope nobody misses WIGO:RW--Brxbrx 19:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)